Paper Grading for CMPT-755

The page limit is 4 pages and the paper must be written using LaTeX. Use the style file colacl06.sty and acl.bst (note: you will need to rename the files after you download them).

A sample paper using this style file and various supporting files (including figures) is provided in samplepaper.zip (you do not need to understand this paper, just look at the way it uses LaTeX, especially the use of the style file, inclusion of figures, and other nuances of fitting into a page limit).

The following guidelines should guide you in your paper writing process. I will look at each of the following points in my grading (each will get equal weight) to determine the final grade for the paper. My advice is to write up a draft and then modify it based on the following points.

• Organization
• what is overall point of the paper
• was the approach and the evaluation or summary clearly presented
• was the paper presented in a clear sequence
• Clarity
• was the presentation clear or confusing
• Readability
• is the language understandable
• are there consistent mistakes in grammar and spelling? such mistakes always make a paper hard to read
• some hints: use a spell-checker, use number of hits in google to see if a particular English construction you are using is widely used or not, try to get someone else to read your paper
• Page limit
• was it within the page limit
• did it take advantage of the page limit (e.g. a 2 page paper with the comment, "Due to lack of space I will not cover ...")
• Examples
• are there adequate examples to explain complex concepts or algorithms
• Formal notation
• was there adequate use of a consistent formal notation to explain concepts or algorithms
• Comparison with well-known ideas
• are there connections made, when appropriate, between the ideas covered in your paper to the concepts learnt in cmpt-755
• Quality of work
• is the paper over and above the minimum required
• an experimental/theoretical comparison was done to compare the various models/algorithms/approaches being surveyed in the paper
• extra relevant publications were found, cited and included in the paper
  
• Methodological issues
• are there errors
• Questions raised
• was the analysis critical (note that this does not mean that you should attack the ideas in the papers) and was the criticism justified
• hints towards open problems and future work