CS 5204
Fall, 2000
Intermediate Reviews of Term Projects
Due: November 9 (in class)
The intermediate reviews are described. The responsibilities of the project team/individual are outlined, the information contained in the review report is given, and the assignments of reviewers for each of the projects is listed. The reports from the intermediate reviews are due in class on November 9.
 

Responsibilities

The general responsibility of the reviewer(s) is to provide critical, helpful feedback and questions to the team/individual whose work is being reviewed. The reviewers and the project teams equally share the responsibility to make arrangements for the review to be conducted by the due date. There are usually two or three reviewers assigned to each programming project. There is one reviewer assigned to each writing project.

The following table outlines the information provided to the reviewer by the project team/individual whose work is being reviewed.
 
 

Information Given to Reviewers by Project Team/Individual
Programming Project
  • an overview of the goals of the project, 
  • a copy of the current source code, and 
  • a demonstration of the current version of the code.
Writing Project
  • a current draft of the paper, and
  • a copy of the original papers

 

The Review Report

Each review team/individual must submit a written report.  The items to be included in the written report are shown in the following table.
 
Contents of Report Written by Review Team/Individual
Programming Project
  • the names of the members of the programming team
  • the names of the reviewer(s)
  • summary of the project as understood by the reviewer(s) (one page)
  • feedback for developer(s) (one page): this includes questions, comments, criticisms, suggestions
Writing Project
  • the name of the author of the writing project
  • the name of the reviewer
  • marked up manuscript of the current draft
  • other comments, questions, criticisms, suggestions

For a review team with two or more members, only one report is written that combines the evaluations of the review team members. One copy of the report is given to the team/individual whose work was reviewed. One copy of the report is submitted to the course instructor.
 

Review Assignments

 
Project Teams
Reviewers
Filiz Ucar  Eric Shell
Fangxing Li, and 
Wei Sun		 Ashwini Pande
 Jiang Shu
Iype Isac and 
Narayanan Govindarajan		 Jing Ma and
Erik Rubin
Vikas Aggrawal, Balaji Krishnamachari-Sampath
and Deepak Rao 		 Chris Knestrick
Brian Salomon
Wei Sun
Timothy Terriberry Filiz Ucar
Mike O'Laughlen and 
Jiunwei Chen		 Fangxing Li
Vinoth Jagannathan
Jing Ma 
Jiang Shu		 Abishek Ram 
 Narayanan Govindarajan
Roy Patrick Tan 
Amit Karnik		 Iype Isac 
Faria Khalid
Pete Schoenhoff 
Markus Lorch		 Jian He 
Matthew Clement
Ni Liu Balaji Krishnamachari-Sampath
Li Wang 
Wensi Xi		 Lenese Colson 
Wensi Xi
Ashwini Pande 
Subhag Oak		 Li Wang 
Alex Verstak
Min Liang 
Zhenping Liu		 Marc Vass 
Jiunwei Chen
Tejas Patel 
Joy Mukherjee		 Mike O'Laughlen 
Zhenping Liu
Rao Shen 
Yuxin Chen		 Min Liang 
Jun Wang
Ming Luo
Jun Wang		 Ni Liu
Srikanth Koneru
Chris Knestrick 
Erik Rubin		 Ravikiran Vatrapu 
Markus Lorch
Marc Vass
Alex Verstak		 Pete Schoenhoff 
Yuxin Chen
Abishek Ram
Vinoth Jagannathan		 Rao Shen 
Amit Karnik
Brian Salomon Ming Luo
Steven Lawrence 
Matthew Clement		 Roy Patrick Tan 
Joy Mukherjee
Lenese Colson Steven Lawrence 
Jian He 
Faria Khalid		 Tejas Patel 
Deepak Rao
Eric Shell Timothy Terriberry
Ravikiran Vatrapu 
Srikanth Koneru		 Vikas Aggrawal
Subhag Oak