Task 2: Review 2 technical papers

(submit using the Fire system)

This task consists of 4 parts. You are supposed to form pairs and do all these parts together.

Task 2a - Choose a partner and 2 papers

You, together with a partner, are going to read and review two technical papers in computer science. You will have to choose a partner, and two papers to review!

The papers have to be published research papers (in a journal or a conference) in computer science. (Computer engineering or mathematics may also be OK.) They have to be of some substantial length (at least ~8 pages, depending on the format, but you may also choose one shorter and one longer paper).

You and your partner may choose yourself which papers you want to read. Perhaps you have a favorite paper that you have come across in a course? Please pick papers for which you and your partner have a chance to understand most of the technical material discussed in the paper. If you have trouble with understanding a paper you have chosen, contact your mentor, who may help you with the understanding, and also guide you about how deep your understanding needs to go in order to write a summary/review.

If you need inspiration, take a look at tips for finding important computer science papers.

Please discuss with your mentor (by e-mail or in person) if the papers you are thinking of are suitable, before you make your choice.

Plan the reading of the papers with your partner. The following note may be helpful:

  • How to read a paper by S. Keshav.

    Deadline: Tuesday, April 3, 12:00.

    Task 2b - Answer basic questions

    In order to prepare you for writing the reviews, we would like you to answer a number of basic questions for each paper. Please submit the answers in a text file or pdf. For each questions, a few sentences should be enough.

  • Is the title of the paper accurate?

  • What is the intended audience of the paper?

  • What is the problem or issue addressed in the paper? Is it clearly explained?

  • What is the relevance of the problem? (Why should anyone care?) Is it clearly explained?

  • Are any existing ways of dealing with the problem (alternative solutions) discussed in the paper?

  • What evidence does the paper contain that the proposed solution to the problem actually is a solution? (Experiments, proofs, ...)

  • Are any examples given in the paper? Are these positive or negative examples? What are the examples meant to illustrate?

  • What can you say about the language used in the paper? (Does the paper use informal or formal language? Does it make use of passive form? Are personal pronouns (I, we, you) used, and in what way?)

    Deadline: Monday, April 9, 12:00.

    Task 2c - Write 2 reviews

    For each of the 2 chosen papers, you write a single text that contains a summary and a review of that paper.

    The text you write should be self-contained, meaning that the reader does not have to have read the paper in detail in order to read and appreciate your summary/review.

    Structure your texts in a way you see fit. Aim for 3-5 pages for each summary/review.

    Make sure you address the basic questions from last week in the review. However, this time, discuss the answers in more depth, allow yourself to be critical, and propose concrete improvements. For example, "the title is not accurate enough, a better title would have been ...", or "if they had included an experiment showing ..., the results would have been more convincing", or "an example of ... before explaining ... would have made things a lot clearer".

    Also, discuss the following points in your text:

  • (If there is an abstract) Which points are mentioned in the abstract, and which points are left out?

  • How does the introduction section introduce the paper?

  • What points are made in the conclusion section, and which points are left out?

    Deadline: Monday, April 16, 12:00.

    Task 2d - Review a review, and reflections

    You will receive a review written by another pair. Your task is to read their review, and write a short review of their text. Identify aspects of their review that you think were good, but also aspects that could be improved. Please look at the structure of the text, the language used, and the contents. You may have to read the paper about which the review is written.

    Your review will be given as feedback to the other pair.

    Also, submit a list of reflections on what you have learnt in this task. Concretely, answer the following question: What will you make yourself think about next time you write a technical text?

    Deadline: Monday, April 23, 12:00.

    Submit everything through the Fire system. (Make sure you submit to the correct task!)