User talk:Jxy374/Final Term Paper

From BIOL 300 Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Student Comments

-"In 1971, Folkman[4] first time hypothesized that every new capillaries converging on the tumor (angiogenesis) led to increase in tumor cells." This sentence has a few grammer typos/errors, so can be rewritten.

-Towards the end of the paper, the "Relationship to Literature" and "Future Work" sections can be better elaborated on. For the Relationship to Literature section, you can elaborate on what the scientists found as the role of VEGF, and why tumor angiogenesis yields a better prognosis.

-Overall, nice job!:)

--Uma Mahajan (talk) 16:00, 30 April 2017 (EDT)

Instructor Comments

  • Term paper survey submitted with term paper?
    • Yes.

Introduction

  • Significance of problem?
    • Yes, clearly stated.
  • Statement of hypothesis?
    • Yes, but should have been highlighted.
  • List of references?
    • Good list (21), clearly read and carefully cited.
  • Properly formatted references?
    • Yes.

Model Description

  • State variables, parameters and inputs to the model clearly distinguished?
    • Yes.
  • Term-by-term description of model components?
    • Yes.
  • Have you described model assumptions?
    • Yes.
  • Description of equation simulation?
    • Yes.

Results

  • Results described and compared to original paper?
    • Yes.
  • Have you addressed the original biological hypothesis?
    • Yes.
  • Figures and legends to show results?
    • Yes.
  • Discrepancies relative to original model?
    • Discussed in the Discussion section.
  • Uploaded Mathematica file?
    • Yes.

Discussion

  • How well does the model support the original hypothesis?
    • Carefully discussed.
  • Support for hypothesis and assumptions from other data in the literature?
    • Yes.
  • Limitations of results?
    • Good discussion.
  • Discrepancies and how they affect conclusions?
    • Good discussion with citations.
  • Relationship to other work in the field?
    • Good discussion with citations.
  • Discussion of future work?
    • Good discussion with citations.

Overall Term Paper Quality

  • How well was the model replicated?
    • Excellent replication.
  • Based on the term paper, how well did you understand the material?
    • Understanding is excellent.
  • How well written is the term paper?
    • Some errors in language, but overall the writing was reasonably clear.
  • How hard was the model extension that you did?
    • Moderately difficult.
  • How good was the extension?
    • Nicely done.
  • Mathematica code clear and well annotated?
    • Nicely laid out. More annotations would have been helpful, but it was all annotated.
  • Mathematica code generates figures when evaluated?
    • Yes.

Overall, this is a very good to excellent term paper. The writing could have been clearer in places, but otherwise this represented a great deal of thoughtful, hard work.

--Hillel Chiel (talk) 08:57, 12 May 2017 (EDT)