OverviewDeliverables and their due DatesGroup WorkGrading PolicyResearch Project:CMSC-491/691 Electronic Voting SystemsSpring 2006, Alan Sherman, UMBCOverviewEach student must complete a research project on a focused topic related to this course. The project must aim to accomplish new, significant results (survey papers are not acceptable). Each student must communicate his or her findings in an oral presentation to the class and in a written report in the format ofa computer science technical report (about 10–20 pages). Every aspect of the project (including proposals, reviews, reports, and presentations) is intended to match the process that professional computerscience researchers follow in carrying out original research. Deliverables and their due DatesMarch 15 Pre-proposal (see separate handout)March 29 ProposalApril 3 Evaluation of a peer proposalApril 10 Progress reportApril 24 Complete draft report and draft presentation for reviewMay 1 Referee report of a peer draft project and presentationMay 3 Oral presentations beginMay 8 Final report, and confidential evaluations of group members (if any)Note: For each deliverable, bring two hard copies to class, and email an electronic version to [email protected] with 491 or 691 in the subject line. One copy is for the instructor; the other is for the reviewer. Always hand in deliverables on one-sided 8.5in 11in one-sided paper, with one staple in the upper-left corner, without any covers or folders.Group WorkStudents are allowed and encouraged (but not required) to work in small groups (of up to at most three members). Typically, but not necessarily, everyone in a group will receive the same grade.Grading PolicyThe project will count for 60% of the semester grade. Each report will be evaluated on the following three criteria: appropriateness for assignment (have you satisfied the specifications?), scientific merit (correctness, significance, novelty, non-triviality, scientific completeness), and effective presentation (clarity, organization, English usage, appropriate style). Each project will be evaluated on the basis of thefinal report (70%), oral presentation (20%), and quality of the group’s referee report (10%).Confidential Evaluation of Group Members (about 1 page or less) Only for groups with more than one member, each member must evaluate the performance andcontribution of each group member (including yourself) to the project. What did each person do and howwell did they do their task? How well did the group function as a team? This evaluation will be read onlyby the instructor.ProposalThe proposal must clearly explain what you are doing, why you are doing it, what is new about yourproject, and what is the significance of your project. The proposal should include a critical review ofprevious related work, specific aims, a plan of attack (how you plan to accomplish your aims), and abibliography. It should also include a realistic schedule, budget, a list of deliverables, and a discussion ofany foreseeable difficulties and how you plan to overcome them. The proposal should follow thegenerally-accepted guidelines for computer science research proposals—for example, as described by theNational Science Foundation on their web pages. I recommend that you evolve your proposal into yourfinal report, reusing as much text as possible.The proposal must be organized as follows:(a) Project Summary Page (one page)Include the following summary information:1. Informative project title. (do not title your project “CMSC-691 Project.”)2. Date.3. Investigator names, affiliations, and email addresses4. Short phrase describing the general area within cryptology of your project.5. Keywords.6. Brief 1-3 sentence project description. Distill your proposal to one focused, well-defined question.7. Assignment of responsibilities to group members (if group work).8. Total budget9. Brief list of deliverable(b) Executive Summary (one page)The executive summary is like an abstract; it is a substitute for the entire proposal. Repeat the title, date,author names and affiliations, and project keywords on the executive summary page(c) MotivationWhat are you doing and why? Why is your work significant, both within your field, and to society atlarge? What is challenging about your proposed work?(d) Previous WorkIdentify and critically comment on selected relevant previous work. How is your project different andbetter than this previous work? Do not simply list previous work.(e) Specific AimsConcretely list the specific problems you propose to solve.(f) PlanHow will you accomplish your specific aims?(g) DeliverablesWhat is the output of your project? E.g., project report, PowerPoint slides, presentation, sourcecode.(h) IssuesWhat difficulties do you foresee, and how do you plan to overcome them?(i) BibliographyList (in proper bibliographic form) all works you need to complete your project.(j) Biographical sketches of the investigator(s)(k) ScheduleList a timeline of major steps toward completing your project.(l) BudgetWhat resources (including your own time) do you need to complete the project? Using a spreadsheet(e.g., Excel), summarize in one simple page your direct, indirect, and total costs. As your indirect costs,include a 47% overhead for UMBC on all direct costs. (Indirect cost is UMBC’s overhead. Direct costsare everything else.) (m) Appendix A: Research ConferenceName a refereed research conference that best matches your project, and identify a recent paper from thisconference that best matches your project (attach a copy of the paper).Evaluation of ProposalEach group will evaluate one other group’s proposal. The format of the evaluation should be an NSF-style review of about 1–3 pages. The evaluation must comment on each of the following elements: (a) Intrinsic scientific merit of proposed research in terms of likely significance, novelty, andnontriviality. (b) Likely broader impact of project on society. (c) Qualifications of investigator to carry out the proposed research successfully. (d) Reasonableness of the proposed budget (does the budget accurately reflect the necessary costs tocomplete the work?). (e) Appropriateness and completeness of proposal to this assignment.(f) Detailed technical comments on proposed problem, awareness of previous work, and plan of attack.(g) Overall evaluation,
View Full Document
Unlocking...