CS6704: Guidelines for Written Critiques


    Reading

    You should expect to read for two to four hours for each discussion session, and to write and think for additional one hour to produce a crituqe for one of the assigned papers. In each session, we will discuss two papers and you are required to submit only ONE critique for ONE of the papers (not both).

    Content

    • Write one to two pages that reflect on what you learned and thought about the paper.
    • The document should be created based on the given latex template. You can use Overleaf to edit latex files.
    • Summary: Use one or two paragraphs to summarize the paper by stating the problem the paper addressed, the solution, and the meaning.
      • Do not simply copy and paste the abstract. Please summarize the paper with your own words.
      • If the summary wrongly describes the problem or the solution, the critique will get 0 point.
    • Strength(s): Use one paragraph (one to three sentences) to describe the paper's strength(s).
      • Do not say things universally true for every paper, like "the paper is well written".
      • Think about the reasons why the paper got accepted, or new things you have learnt by reading this paper.
    • Weakness(es): Use one paragraph (one to three sentences) to describe the paper's weakness(es).
      • Do not say things as general as "the paper is hard to read".
      • Identify some limitation of the approach or some flaws in the algorithm design.
    • Analysis I: Focus on one weakness of the paper and explain it with more details. Some possible weaknesses may be:
      • What questions remain open?
      • What experiments are missing?
      • Some examples for which it will not work.
      • What part of the algorithm is problematic and why?
      Please also suggest your new approach to solve the problem. If some problems are really hard to solve, identifying flaws in the solution is easier than proposing a better approach. Please be constructive when discussing about weaknesses. You may lose points for NOT suggesting any new approach/direction.
    • Analysis II: Discuss about ideas or thoughts the paper provoked.
      • Please provide some details about the new problems you identify or new research directions inspired.
      • For each newly identified problem, please suggest some potential solutions for it.
      • If no new idea is inspired, you can simply focus on another weakness of the paper and follow the instruction of Analysis I.

    Grading

    I will evaluate critiques on a 10-point scale. There is one bonus point available. Most critiques will receive 10 points at most.

    • 1 point for summary
    • 1 point for strengths
    • 1 point for weaknesses
    • 2.5 points for Analysis I
    • 2.5 points for Analysis II
    • 1 point for format, grammar, and spelling. Please use Microsoft Word software to do simple grammar checking before submitting the critique.
    • 1 point for clarity and grace, i.e., clear, well organized arguments or sentences in well organized paragraphs. Please avoid long and complicated sentences.
    • 1 bonus point for deep analysis and/or surprising me with a really interesting idea.

    Late policy

    Critiques are due at the beginning of the class for the assigned papers. No late critique is accepted except in the case of illness.

    Acknowledgement

    This webpage is created based on Dr. Kathryn S. McKinley's course requirements on written critiques. I sincerely appreicate Kathryn's great effort of compiling the detailed requirements.