Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

History
31 lines (26 loc) · 2.1 KB

PeerReviewSummary_3.2.md

File metadata and controls

31 lines (26 loc) · 2.1 KB
Raw

Peer Review Summary for Project 3.2 in CMPSC 600 Fall 2019

Please fill out the following checklist and answer the questions below.

Proposal Draft Author:

Peer Reviewer:

Date of the review:

Checklist

  • The title of the proposal seems appropriate and exciting.
  • The abstract of the proposal provides a short summary of the proposed work.
  • The introduction section clearly describes the proposed work (what is being proposed).
  • The introduction section motivates the proposed work (why do the proposed work) with the help of existing research and includes several references.
  • The related work section describes relevant literature related to the proposed work.
  • The related work section situates the proposed project in the broader scope of related work.
  • The method section explains the process to be utilized in the proposed study (how the proposed work will be completed).
  • The method section includes the description of algorithms, programming languages, platforms and software (as relevant) that will be used in the proposed project.
  • The method section includes a demonstration of feasibility.
  • The evaluation section describes the process to be undertaken to validate the proposed work using applicable evaluation metrics.
  • The proposal includes a detailed schedule.
  • The conclusion section discusses the impact of the proposed work and outlines avenues for future work.
  • The proposal includes at least twelve references.
  • The proposal consists of at least ten pages.
  • The proposal follows a logical flow.
  • The proposal includes visual aids in terms of figures, tables, and/or graphs.
  • There are no typographical or grammatical errors in the proposal draft.
  • There is no extraneous text.

Summary

Provide a summary of the positive and negative aspects of the proposal draft you have reviewed. Specify any places in the reviewed proposal where you did not understand the point, or needed more information, or where something did not seem to belong in the proposal. You have to write at least five sentences in this paragraph.