Assignments
| Student | Supervisor | Topic |
|---|---|---|
| Kairi Hennoch | --- | Finding patterns for dynamically generated classes from Java stack traces |
| Kerwin Jorbina | Fabrizio Maggi | Porting predictive modelling code from GNU R to Java |
| Siim-Toomas Marran | --- | Scraping car prices from the internet |
| Markus Lippus | Sven Laur | Python library for k-means clustering with missing values |
| Aqeel Labash | Tambet Matiisen | Sentiment mining using recurrent neural networks |
| Ants-Oskar Mäesalu | --- | Creation of ontology for treatment procedures |
Reviewing tasks
The following table describes which persons you need to review. So find your row and review the persons who are in this row.
| Student | Must review 1 | Must review 2 |
|---|---|---|
| Kairi Hennoch | Markus Lippus | Ants-Oskar Mäesalu |
| Kerwin Jorbina | Markus Lippus | Kairi Hennoch |
| Markus Lippus | Kerwin Jorbina | Ants-Oskar Mäesalu |
| Ants-Oskar Mäesalu | Kairi Hennoch | Kerwin Jorbina |
| Aqeel Labash | Siim-Toomas Marran | Markus Lippus |
| Siim-Toomas Marran | Aqeel Labash | Markus Lippus |
Reviewing guidlines
- Review is not a listing of grammar errors
- Review is a listing of logical errors and ideas to pursue further
- It is ok to say in the review that you did not understand certain paragraphs or concepts
- Review should give suggestion in terms of presentation of ideas and layout
- Review should contain a clear opinion about the work you are reviewing
- Still be polite and write the review in the form you would like to receive
First write a short paragraph describing the work as a whole. Write what is good and bad in it and derive your final judgement about the work. Next fill the following reviewing form. This review form contains questions that provide a framework to structure you critical comments into separate blocks. So use those question sections to convey your critical comments about the work.
A good review mostly discards all grammar mistakes and deals with presentation and content. Try to write something that yourself would find instructive if you were an author. In particular, mark all places which you cannot understand or which seem illogical to you as a reader. For those of you who have not done it before, there is a longer Estonian tutorial how to review. It is a long text and covers different reviewing levels so do not implement all suggestions. Send the final review to me and the person who you are reviewing. If you do not know the mail address of the author send it only to me. I will forward it.
- I will not accept reviews that contains only a listing of grammar errors
- I will not accept reviews that have no clear opinion about the work
- The opinion can be completely wrong or unfair as long as it is justified
Presentations
- ...
Progress
| Student | Initial draft | First draft | Reviews | Final report |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Kairi Hennoch | OK | OK | OK | ok |
| Kerwin Jorbina | OK | OK | OK | OK |
| Siim-Toomas Marran | ok | ok | OK | OK |
| Markus Lippus | OK | OK | OK | OK |
| Aqeel Labash | ok | ok | OK | OK |
| Ants-Oskar Mäesalu | OK | ok | OK | -- |