1 / 4

Christoph F. Eick

COSC 6342 Fall 2014 Project2: Making Sense of Data—Apply Machine Learning to an Interesting Dataset. Discussion2. Christoph F. Eick. Project2 Deliveries : 2-page Progress Report Group Presentation Final Report Tentative Weights of Non-Exam Parts of the Course:

necia
Download Presentation

Christoph F. Eick

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. COSC 6342Fall 2014Project2: Making Sense of Data—Apply Machine Learning to an Interesting Dataset Discussion2 Christoph F. Eick

  2. Project2 Deliveries: • 2-page Progress Report • Group Presentation • Final Report Tentative Weights of Non-Exam Parts of the Course: Project1:20% Project2:14% Homework1+2: 7%

  3. Project2 Presentations and Grading • Each presentation has 11 minutes—not shorter not longer! • One group member of each group will serve as judge, evaluating the presentations of the other groups. The other 2/3 group members need to participate in the presentation. In general, students will judge themselves together with Wellington. • All group member (except those who serve as judges) must participate in the presentation • Presentations count about 30% towards the Project3 grade and will be judged based on: • Content (does the presentation have a clear story/message to tell? Scientific Quality? Is the project technically sound?) Weight=2 • Topic (is the topics interesting?) Weight=1 • Form (is the presentation understandable, quality of slide, quality on how the content was delivered) Weight=2 • Time Management (did the group wisely use the available time; was the presentation too short/long) Weight=1 • Scoring System: 1-10 (10 is outstanding; 1 is very very poor; the expected average score for such events is typically between 6 and 7; moreover, ‘-’ abstain should be chosen, when evaluating your own group and if having a ‘true’ conflict of interest with respect to presenters of another group. • 5% of the score is allocated to the 2-page progress report • The remaining 60% of the project will be evaluated based on (using the same 1-10 scale) • Technical Quality and Content of the Project (weighted by 3) • Amount of Work • Form and Quality of the report • Interestingness of the chosen topic • Dr. Eick will grade the Project2 Reports

  4. Project Report • Report Lengths 9-11 pages in NIPS Format, single-spaced. Feel free to use appendices which do not count towards the page limit for very large other exhibits of your work. • Organization: Introduction-Main Part-Summary-References (no abstract is necessary!). Summary can be short; e.g. 2-4 paragraphs. • If you have some doubts, see Dr. Eick during his office hour.

More Related