Critiques (Due 9PM the evening before class)

• Our primary goal is to give you the ability to extract deep understanding from original research papers. To teach you how to evaluate what you read.

• 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. Some are intuitive great but flawed on deeper inspection. Understanding how research progresses shows you how to stand on the shoulders of giants.

• A critique is due at 9PM the evening before the class in which the critiqued paper is presented. You may choose which of the assigned papers in a given week 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 full 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. Use the provided LaTeX template. 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. Simply restating portions of the paper in these sections is a common mistake that will result in missed points. Copying portions of the paper verbatim without attribution will result in more missed points.

You will find that reading technical papers can be challenging. It is a skill that must be practiced. You can find some guidelines that may be helpful

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. Use the provided LaTeX template.

• Sample critique
• The LaTeX file
• The LaTeX bibliography file

Grading

I shall evaluate critiques on a ten-point scale. You may earn one bonus point per critique. Most critiques should 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.
• 2 possible bonus point for deep analysis and/or surprisingly interesting ideas.

Late Policy

Critiques are due at 9:00pm 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.