Final Report

Your final report is the culmination of your project and should present your final results. Your report should be drafted in LaTeX and the resulting PDF uploaded to this Canvas assignment.

Tone and Style Advice

In tone and style your report should be similar to the formal research papers we have read over the semester. Your target audience is other Computer Science majors, that is readers who knowledgeable about Computer Science, but not necessarily knowledgeable about your specific problem domain. Your report is not a "ship's log" or a diary, the reader is interested in your results not a play-by-play description of the process. Focus on your results and use those results to guide the story you will tell. Write clearly, concisely and with specificity. Avoid generalities.

Advice adapted from Pomona's senior experience.

FAQ

Can we use the active voice, e.g. say "we did X..."?

Yes! I believe this kind of technical writing should use the active voice, and I encourage you to do so. That said, others may have different views on active vs. passive voice so make sure to find out the expectations of other faculty or the conventions in other fields.

What if section XX is shorter than the suggested length in the template file?

I don’t want you to get too hung up on the length expectations, especially any notion of a minimum length. Those are estimates on my part, which may not end up making sense for your project. Write as much as you need to fully, and with sufficient detail, address the listed elements for each section.

What is the Problem Statement section? I have not encountered that before...

The “Problem Statement" section is one of the differences between this class report and a conference paper.

In the "Problem Statement" section, I want you to very clearly articulate the problem you were trying to solve (and the background necessary to understand that problem). The goals are two-fold: the problem statement defines the deliverables for the project (a key part of this as a class project) and helps me, as a non-expert, better understand the problem you are solving (unlike a conference paper where you can make some assumptions about the knowledge of the audience). The boundary between the introduction and the problem statement will be a little grey (and there may even be some repetition), but I think of it as the “Introduction" addressing “Why” and the "Problem Statement" addressing “What”.

What tense do I use?

Typically the past tense. You are reporting work you have already done.

I am seeing weird characters, e.g. many "?"s, in my LaTeX document. What is happening?

Be careful when copying from a WYSIWYG editor, like Word, into your LaTeX source. Word will replace certain punctuation, like double quotes, and combinations of letters, like "ff", into different character codes for fancy versions of those characters (e.g., 'smart quotes') that LaTeX can't render. Make sure you copy over plain text.

Grading Rubric

Your papers will be graded across six dimensions:

  • (3) Organization and Structure - follow a logical paper structure.
  • (3) Spelling and Grammar - errors should not inhibit reading of the work; you should correct issues identified in the rough draft.
  • (4) Intro, Problem & Related Work - your introductory sections are clear enough for other undergraduates to read, and set up the problem as well as related approaches.
  • (6) Methods - your interesting techniques and algorithms are clearly described.
  • (6) Results - you have information, graphs, tables, etc. that help understand the strengths and weaknesses of your project.
  • (3) Discussion & Future Work - summarize outcomes of the project and possible extensions.

The sections sum to 25 points.

Organization and Structure

  • Excellent (3 pts).
    Paper flows logically. Paragraphs clearly guide the reader through a progression of ideas.
  • Good/Fair (2 pts).
    Paper flows logically, though some elements of organization and coherence are missing. Paragraphs guide the reader through a progression of ideas.
  • Needs Improvement (1 pt).
    Paper is missing several elements of organization and coherence. Ideas are loosely connected.

Spelling and Grammar

  • Excellent (3pts).
    No spelling & grammar mistakes
  • Good/Fair (2pts).
    Minimal, but noticeable, spelling & grammar mistakes
  • Needs Improvement (1pt).
    Excessive spelling and/or grammar mistakes

  • Excellent (4 pts).
    Provides clear purpose and intent for the project; pertinent examples, facts, and/or statistics; supports ideas with evidence. Should address the project's novelty and what the group aims to accomplish by completing the project. Addresses audience at an appropriate level (rigorous, but generally understandable to a scientifically-minded group and under the assumption that some members of the audience are unfamiliar with the specifics of your project area.)

  • Good/Fair (2pts).
    Several of the following elements are present: Purpose and intent for the project is explained, but not in a clear manner. The project's novelty is loosely explained. Addresses audience at a level (either extremely technical or with no technical rigor) that makes the project somewhat difficult to understand.

  • Needs Improvement (1 pt).
    Several of the following elements are present: Purpose and intent for the project is not explained. The project's novelty is not clearly explained. Addresses audience at a level (either extremely technical or with no technical rigor) that makes the project difficult to understand.

Methods Section

  • Excellent (6 pts).
    Clearly describes methods, algorithms, and tools used to solve the problem. Clearly describes methods using pseudocode, if appropriate, and describes datasets used for development and testing, if applicable.
  • Good/Fair (4 pts).
    Description of methods, algorithms, and tools used to solve the problem are somewhat unclear, though the main elements are present. Incomplete or missing pseudocode and/or description of dataset(s)
  • Needs Improvement (2 pts).
    Description of methods, algorithms, and tools used to solve the problem are unclear or vague. Missing pseudocode and/or description of dataset(s).

Results

  • Excellent (6 pts).
    Clearly presents graphs, charts, tables, etc. to illustrate the results of the project. Discusses positive outcomes as well as limitations of the work.
  • Good/Fair (4 pts).
    Results of the work are not clearly shown or are not conveyed in a manner that is easily discernible to the audience, including the use of graphs, charts, tables, etc. Limited discussion on the positive outcomes or potential limitations of the work.
  • Needs Improvement (2 pts).
    Results of the work are not shown or are not conveyed in a manner that is easily discernible to the audience. Limited or no graphs, charts, tables, etc. Does not discusses positive outcomes or potential limitations of the work.

Discussion & Future Work

  • Excellent (3 pts).
    Provides a clear summary of outcomes of the project. Clearly discusses some of the weaknesses of the project and possible methods for improving on these. Articulates possible extensions of your work.
  • Good/Fair (2 pts).
    Provides a summary of outcomes of the project. Discusses some of the weaknesses of the project, but does not provide possible methods for improving on these. Weakly provides extensions of this project.
  • Needs Improvement (1 pt).
    Provides a weak summary of outcomes of the project. Does not discuss the weaknesses of the project or provide possible methods for improving on these. Does not provide extensions of this project.