Goals
To give you the ability to extract deep understanding from
original
research papers. To teach you how to evaluate what you read.
Reading
You should expect to read for four or five hours each week and
to write
and think for an additional two hours to produce a critique for
one of
the assigned papers for the week. Some of these papers have
great ideas,
but are hard to understand. Some seem obvious in
retrospect. Understanding
how research progresses shows you how to stand on the shoulders
of giants.
We will emphasize the historical context in which the work was
done to
help us understand it.
A critique is due at the beginning of the class in which the
critiqued
paper is presented. You may choose which of the two assigned
papers to
critique. No late critiques will be accepted. If you are giving
a
presentation that week, you are not responsible for a
critique.
You will write one to two pages that reflect on what you
learned and
thought about the paper. The critique includes a short summary,
but most of it will contain your original thoughts about the
paper
and what you learned.
The following format is mandatory:
- The document will be in 12 point font, single spaced.
- Set the stage. Begin with no more than a quarter page
that states the
problem that the paper addressed, the solution, and the
meaning.
- State the strength(s) of the paper in one to three
sentences.
- State the weakness(es) of the paper in one to three
sentences.
- The remainder of your critique will
include two of the following:
- How did it impact the field?
- What questions remain
open?
- What experiments are
missing?
- How does it really
relate to the previous
research?
- Future
directions.
- Some
examples
for which
it will or
will not
work.
- What
impact
did
it
have
on
the
field?
- Could
a
similar
paper
be
pulished
today?
- Ideas
or
thoughts
it
provoked.
- Other
interesting
commentary.
Note: the strengths, weaknesses, and additional
discussion should not just
summarize what the paper did. They should present your own
thoughts after having
digested the material.
Sample (courtesy of
Kathryn McKinley)
Below is an example and more explanation about the structure of
a critique
and the required format. Please read it. I would prefer that you
use the
LaTeX template below, but if you do not you are still required
to follow
the formatting guidelines (12 point font, single spaced).
Grading
I shall evaluate critiques on a ten-point scale. You may earn
one bonus
point per critique. Most critiques will receive 10 points.
- 8 points for the required sections: 1 point each for
summary, strengths,
and weaknesses; 2.5 points each for each of the two analysis
questions.
- 1 point for grammar and spelling
- 1 point for clarity and grace (i.e., clear, well
organized arguments in
well organized paragraphs.
- 1 possible bonus point for deep analysis and/or
surprisingly interesting
ideas.
Late Policy
Critiques are due at 11:59pm the night before the
class in which the
critiqued paper is presented. No late critiques shall be
accepted, except in
the case of illness or other reasonable circumstance.
Ethics
As a scientist, you are expected to maintain the highest
ethical standards,
do your own work, report on it accurately, and acknowledge any
assistance.
Feel free to discuss lectures, reading, and assignments with me
and other
members of the class. You may discuss ideas. You may not copy
text from your
peers or other sources. Turning in any work that is not original
may be
reported to the university and you may even fail the
course.
This guide for critiques comes courtesy of
Antony
Hosking
Presentation Advice
Goals
To help students learn to clearly communicate technical material
with others.
Each presenter will prepare a 30-35 minute talk on the paper(s)
that he or she
presents that week. Slides for the talk must be emailed to the
professor by
midnight before the class. The presenter also leads
another 20-30 minutes of
discussion during/after the talk. For this, the presenter will
prepare
questions that lead to a deeper analysis of the paper's content,
presentation,
strengths, and weaknesses. Students do not need to write critiques
for weeks
in which they present. You may adapt slides from other
presentations as long
as you acknowledge your sources.
- Prepare ~15 slides. This does not count animations or other
techniques to
explain or illustrate the technique within a slide.
- Illustrate how the technique works. Use an example,
whether concrete or
abstract. Do not explain the technique with verbose
writing.
- Consider the strengths and weaknesses. Is the technique
reasonable? Is the
evaluation realistic?
- Prepare discussion questions.
- Be prepared to answer questions. The talk should
fuel discussion and problems
that we will work through together. As much as
possible, the presenter should
act as an expert consultant during these
discussions.
Grading
I shall evaluate your talk on a ten point scale. There is one
bonus point
available. Most talks will receive a ten.
- 4 points for clearly explaining the ideas in the paper.
- 3 points for clear, well organized slides.
- 3 points for leading stimulating discussion.
- 1 point for exceeding my expectations in some
area.
This guide for presentations comes courtesy of
Antony
Hosking
- Mark Hill's Oral Presentation Advice [
Link ]
- Dave Patterson's Presentation Advice [
Link ]
