Skip to content

pucrs-automated-planning/term-projects-2020

Folders and files

NameName
Last commit message
Last commit date

Latest commit

 

History

28 Commits
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Repository files navigation

term-projects-2020

Repository for Term Project Material in 2020

Presentation Schedule -- Proposals (Online Teams)

Time Slot Title Presenter
9h50 Automated planning for fMRI paradigms design using PDDL Katherine Esper
10h15 Finding Parallel Regions with Temporal Planning Claudio Scheer
10h40 Learning Action Preconditions from Step-by-step Intructions in Planning Domains Maurício Steinert

Assessment Criteria

Part 1: Project presentation

The first assessment grading criteria is as follows (you should follow the proposed structure).

  • Application Domain Complexity (30%) - How complex the application domain you selected is difficult to model, yet realistically achievable within the course.
  • Paper readability (40%) - How well written the 2-page paper you wrote is, we break this down into the following criteria
    • 20% - Introduction clarity: how well does the introduction answers these questions: what is the problem? why is it an important problem? how do aim to solve it? and what follows from your proposed solution?
    • 10% - How well do you refer to background material and relate it your proposed application area?
    • 10% - How detailed and realistically you plan the work for the rest of the semester?
  • Presentation clarity (30%) - How well you presented your project proposal, which we break down into three criteria
    • 10% - Use of time during the presentation
    • 10% - Slide quality (conciseness, use of figures, etc)
    • 10% - Presentation organization

Part 2: Project Report

The second assessment grading criteria uses two main criteria First, the technical form of the project

  • Application Domain Complexity (15%) - How complex the application domain you selected is difficult to model, yet realistically achievable within the course.
  • Domain Modelling (15%) - How close to the underlying domain is the planning model developed in the project? Are the proposed simplifications justified? What is the tradeoff of these simplifications?
  • Problem Complexity (15%) - How complex are the problem instances used in the experimentation? Are these instances computationally challenging or are they just toy problems?
  • Formalism Appropriateness (15%) - Is the selected formalism (Classical Planning of various types, HTN planning, reinforcement learning) appropriate for the selected domain? Is this selection justified?

Second, the report describing the project and its results

  • Report Clarity (10%): Is the report clearly written, following the guidelines for part 1
  • Report Problem Description (15%): Does the report describe the problem being addressed with enough detail that it can be replicated?
  • Report Implementation (15%): Does the report describe the solution both technically and theoretically in a way that allows others to replicate it?

Part 3: Final Presentation

The same criteria for the project presentation applies to the final presentation, with the following weights

  • 30% - Use of time during the presentation
  • 30% - Slide quality (conciseness, use of figures, etc)
  • 40% - Presentation organization

About

Repository for Term Project Material in 2020

Resources

Stars

Watchers

Forks

Releases

No releases published

Packages

No packages published

Contributors 3

  •  
  •  
  •