User talk:Nak61/Benchmark IV: Discussion
In the first section, cite the study by Horowitz et al. Also when discussing the limitations and future work it would strengthen your points if you cited a source to support those ideas. Overall, very good conclusion and good explanation of our discrepenacies and limitations. --Thomas Schlechter (talk) 22:46, 26 April 2017 (EDT)
-In the first section, second sentence, say "The chance of..." instead of "Chance of". In the immediately following sentence, move the comma from after "hypothesis" to after "Therefore".
-The future work section seems vague in how many additional parameters you would add, and their importance to understanding the overall system. I would add some sort of number, and talk to the difficulty in expanding the model.
- Benchmark submitted on time?
- Rubric submitted on time?
- How well does the model support the original hypothesis?
- Support for hypothesis and assumptions from other data in the literature?
- A good start, but more needed
- Limitations of results?
- Discrepancies and how they affect conclusions?
- Very good
- Relationship to other work in the field?
- Not addressed. You need to include a summary of related research, complete with several references.
- Discussion of future work
On the whole, this is a fair to good Discussion benchmark. You could make it into a very good Discussion by adding a nice discussion of the other work in the field, which is a required part of the assignment.