Homework Overview

Textbook problem

1. Team G1: 1.1, 2.2, 3.3, 4.4, 5.5, 6.6, 7.7, 8.8
2. Team G2: 1.2, 2.3, 3.4, 4.5, 5.6, 6.7, 7.8, 8.9
3. Team G3: 1.3, 2.4, 3.5, 4.6, 5.7, 6.8, 7.9, 8.10
4. Team G4: 1.4, 2.5, 3.6, 4.7, 5.8, 6.9, 7.10, 8.11
5. Team G5: 1.5, 2.6, 3.7, 4.8, 5.9, 6.10, 7.11, 8.12
6. Team G6: 1.6, 2.7, 3.8, 4.9, 5.10, 6.11, 7.12, 8.13
7. Team G7: 1.7, 2.8, 3.9, 4.10, 5.11, 6.12, 7.13, 8.14
8. Team G8: 1.8, 2.9, 3.10, 4.11, 5.12, 6.13, 7.14, 8.15
9. Team G9: 1.9, 2.10, 3.11, 4.12, 5.13, 6.14, 7.15, 8.16
10. Team G10: 1.10, 2.11, 3.12, 4.13, 5.14, 6.15, 7.16, 8.17
11. Team G11: 1.11, 2.12, 3.13, 4.14, 5.15, 6.16, 7.17, 8.18
12. Team G12: 1.12, 2.13, 3.14, 4.15, 5.16, 6.17, 7.18, 8.19
13. Team G13: 1.13, 2.14, 3.15, 4.16, 5.17, 6.18, 7.19, 8.20

1. T1: assigned exercises from chapters 1 and 2
2. T2: assigned exercises from chapters 3 and 4
3. T3: assigned exercise from chapter 4 5
4. T4: assigned exercise from chapter 5 and 6
5. T5: assigned exercises from chapters 7 and 8
6. T6: assigned exercises from chapters 8

Analyzing a research paper

• A0. Identify the members in your team. Provide names, student ids, email addresses and web urls for each team member.
• A1. Identify the paper P your team would present. Choose a paper which is already scheduled to be discussed in the course in weeks 4 thru 14. Identify the team member responsible for 2000 word narrative on the selected paper. Identify the team member responsible for preparing 10 transparecies and the oral presentation in lecture.
• A2. Identify two other papers say Q and R. You team will peer-review presentations prepared by other teams on Q and R.
• A3. Submit 3 printed copies and an electronic copy (plaintext or other standard format files) of the narrative and slides. Use file formats (e.g. powerpoint, pdf), which are supported widely by browsers. Electronic copy will be linked to the web-page for the course to make those available to the audience. Paper copies will be distributed to reviewers to provide feedback. The written critique should be about 2000 words long and the oral presentation should consist of about 10 transparencies addressing the following questions:
  • Problem statement: Formally define the problem addressed in the paper. Briefly explain the significance of the problem in context of our course.
  • List the major contributions of the paper. Which do you think is most significant and why?
  • What are the key concepts behind the approach in this paper. Provide simple explanations of those. Also provide a couple of simple exercises for the audience to check their undersanding of the key concepts.
  • What is the validation methodology (e.g. case studies, statistical hypothesis testing, proofs, simulation) used in this paper? Describe the strengths and weaknesses of the methodology. Why did authors choose this methodology?
  • List the assumptions made by the authors. Critique an assumption that you believe is unreasonable. What is the impact of removing this unreasonable assumption on the solution proposed by the authors?
  • If you were to rewrite this paper today, what would you preserve and what would be revise? Briefly justify.
• A4. Review the presentation on papers Q and R using the following criteria: technical accuracy of review, presentation (easy to understand, examples), analysis and insights beyond the paper summary available on textbook web-site. You are expected to submit two paper copies and an electronic copy of your 500 word narrative summarizing the findings as well as a list of 3 to 4 specific improvements. For the peer review, BOTH members on a team should provide input to both of the other papers critiques. Do not split the work of reviewing as it reduces feedback to the authors.
• A5. Revise your presentation on paper P using the feedback from reviewers. Prepare a 500 word narrative summarizing the revisions for suggested improvements from reviewers. Place the revised presentation and narrative on the web and ensure that the course web-site has a link to your material.
• A6. Submit two questions to test the understanding of key concepts in P in a closed-book examination. Attach model solutions to each questions. Each question should be answerable in 10 minutes. Questions should be problem-solving in nature with a unique answers.
• A7. Make a 15-minute oral presentation in the class on paper P.

Project/Term-Paper

• P1. Define possible questions, i.e. preliminary proposal outlining areas of interest based on the examination of textbook and course material. The question should be related to a topic covered in the course but not completely addressed by the papers in the reading list.
• P2. Identify key sources, types of evidence. Include a list of sources. The potential source for the paper is a recent conference proceedings or a journal in the database area. Students should visit library, web (e.g. DBLP, ACM DL, IEEE DL for papers and amazon.com for book) and fellow students specializing in the database research area, to check the availability of the sources before listing them. Provide summary of search results from DBLP and amazon.com to illustrate the effort.
• P3. Summary of key readings. This summary is more than a list of summaries for individual research papers using the hints in the section on analyzing a research paper. A possible approach is to find a common abstract problems adressed by all the paper and develop a simple classification system to compare the solutions proposed in individual papers. Look at the "literature survey" sections of the papers in the reading list (particularly the thsoe from ACM Computing Surveys) for examples.
• P4. Possible outline or overall structure for paper / project. Do include a justfication comparing and contrasting your proposed paper / project with the summary of key readings. There should be a clear statement of the new aspects of your work. Look at the "literature survey and our contribution" sections of the papers in the reading list for examples.
• P5. Formal proposal : Includes questions or thesis, key resources, and proposed structure revised with feedback from peers and the instructor. The proposal should list a methodology to valiate the claims made in the contributions section. Choose a methodology similar to the ones used in the papers in the reading list. For example, experiments, analytial methods, case study, detailed illustrative examples, prototyping and demonstration of new capability, etc. There should be a clear plan to list the steps within each methodology. For example an experimental methodology should include a description of the experiment design listing the candidates to be compared, metrics of performance, values of fixed parameters, valuesets for variable parameters, benchmark datasets and computations, key assumptions, etc.
• P6. Rough draft. Follow the outlines from the research papers covered in the course. For example, the draft may have 5 sections:
  • Problem Statement, Significance of the problem
  • Related Work and Our Contributions
  • Propsoed Approach
  • Validation of listed contributtion (experimental, analytical)
  • Conclusions and Future Work
• P7. Review the list of class projects. You will be assigned two class project to review.
• P8. Review the assigned course projects. Use one of the following review forms: old , new . You are expected to submit 500 word comment to authors including a list of 3 to 4 specific suggestions for improvements. For the peer review, BOTH members on a team should provide input to both of the other papers critiques. Do not split the work of reviewing as it reduces feedback to the authors.
• P9. Revise your project using the feedback from reviewers. Prepare a 500 word narrative summarizing the revisions for suggested improvements from reviewers. You may also discuss what would I do if I were to redo the paper?. Place the revised presentation and narrative on the web and ensure that the course web-site has a link to your material.
• P10. Oral presentation in the class using 10 to 15 transparencies.
  • Each project presentation should be limited to 15 minutes to allow completion of 4 to 5 presentations in a 75 minute meeting. Limit each presentation to less than 10 slides since an average presenter takes about 2 minutes to explain a typical slide. Know which slide you should be on at the end of 10 minutes and 12 minutes to ensure proper pace. A partner within each group should watch time and let the speaker know when 5 minutes are left or 2 minutes are left.
  • Presentations on survey papers should include motivation, major problems in the area, key results, open problems, and key sources. Focus on major problems and key results. Use summary figures (e.g. classification diagram for all approached to recovery in the Computing Survey paper in our readings) or tables to highlight key messages.
  • Presentations on projects should follow the format of paper analysis. Candidate sections include motivation, problem definition, key issues and alternative ways of resolving those, related work and their limitations, your approach, validation, conclusions (key contributions), and future work (assumptions and potential extensions).

Sample Projects/Term-Papers