COMP7710 Semester 1, 2025
Final Project - Marking Criteria

Name, and Project Topic Mark




Excellent Good Satisfactory Unsatisfactory
Problem
Definition

• Topic introduction gives audience
a very good understanding of the
topic.
• Presenter demonstrated superior
knowledge of the topic, its
theoretical and practical aspects, the
datasets, and the timeline.

• Topic introduction gives
audience a good understanding
of the topic.
• Presenter demonstrated good
knowledge of the topic, its
theoretical and practical aspects,
the datasets, and project timeline.

• Topic introduction gives audience a
general understanding of the topic.
• Presenter demonstrated credible
knowledge of the topic, its theoretical
and practical aspects, the datasets,
and project timeline.

• Topic introduction is not clear.
• Presenter demonstrated limited/no
knowledge of the topic, its theoretical
and practical aspects, the datasets,
and project timeline.

5%
5 4 2.5 - 3 0 - 2
Presentation &
Communication
• Entire presentation is very well
paced and appears well
practiced.
• Information is logically
sequenced, with clear
objectives and signposting to
make it easy to follow.
• Visual aids are informative
and effective, and not
distracting.
• The notebook is
exceptionally well-
commented. Comments
are clear, concise, and
consistently used to
explain the purpose and
logic of code blocks.
• Presentation is well paced,
with very little rushing and
appears practiced.
• Information is logically
sequenced, with some clear
objectives and signposting to
make it fairly easy to follow.
• Most visual aids are
informative and effective.
• The notebook is generally
well-commented. Most
code blocks are explained
clearly, and comments
aid in understanding the
overall logic.
• Presentation’s pace is a little
inconsistent with pauses or
rushing at times.
• Information is logically
sequenced, with signposting
to guide audience through
presentation.
• Most visual aids are informative.
• The notebook includes some
comments, but they are sparse,
inconsistent, or only explain obvious
parts of the code.
• Presentation’s pace is
inconsistent making it difficult
to follow at times.
• Information is not logically
sequenced, and planned
progression is not clear.
• Visual aids are not used or some
are not informative.
• The notebook lacks meaningful
comments. Comments are
either missing, overly generic,
or irrelevant.
5%
5 4 2.5 - 3 0 - 2

COMP7710 Semester 1, 2021
Final Project – Demo and Report - Marking Criteria



Excellent Good Satisfactory Unsatisfactory
Proposed
Solutions
(3 or more methods)

• The proposed solutions are as
accurate as possible and
makes use of the most
relevant algorithms.
• The approach used to arrive at
the solution is clear and
insightful.
• The proposed solutions are
reasonably accurate and
makes use of relevant
algorithms.
• The approach used to arrive at
the solution is mostly clear.
• The proposed solutions are of
acceptable accuracy and mostly
makes use of relevant algorithms.
• The approach used to arrive at the
solution is communicated with some
detail.
• The proposed solutions have
major problems OR the
proposed algorithms are
irrelevant OR the problem is
incorrectly addressed.
• It is unclear how the proposed
solution is arrived at.
5%
5 4 2.5 - 3 0 - 2
Background and
Related Works
(3 or more methods)


• A detailed description is given
on how the related
algorithms operate.
• References were used well to
support points being made and
were always cited correctly.
• A reasonably detailed
description is given on how
the related algorithms
operate.
• References were used well in
some places to support points
being made and were always
cited correctly.
• A good general description is
given on how the related
algorithms operate.
• References adequately
supported important points
being made and were almost
always cited correctly.
• A limited description is given on
how the related algorithms
operate.
• References were not used OR
were rarely cited correctly.
5%
5 4 2.5 - 3 0 - 2
Evaluation

• Excellent evaluation of the
accuracy of the proposed
solutions in comparison to
alternative approaches.
• The methods of analysis used
are thoroughly explained.
• Good evaluation of the
accuracy of the proposed
solutions in comparison to
alternative approaches.
• The methods of analysis used
are reasonably well-explained.
• Fairly good evaluation of the
accuracy of the proposed
solutions in comparison to the
alternative approaches.
• The methods of analysis used are
presented but missing some
detail.
• Shallow or limited evaluation of
the accuracy in comparison to
the alternative approaches.
• The methods of analysis used
are unclear.
10%
9-10 8 5-7 0 - 4
Question & Answer
(Total mark allocated
to this section will be
equally distributed
across all questions.)
• Presenter demonstrated a clear
and detailed understanding of
the questions.
• Questions are answered
professionally and to a high level
of detail, demonstrating
advanced knowledge of the
topic.

• Presenter demonstrated a
reasonably detailed
understanding of the
questions.
• Questions are answered
professionally and to an
adequate level of detail,
demonstrating a reasonably
detailed understanding of
the topic.

• Presenter demonstrated a good
general understanding of the
questions.
• Questions are answered with
some detail, demonstrating a
good general understanding of
the proposed approach or
research topic.

• Presenter demonstrated a
limited or shallow
understanding of the questions.
• Questions are not answered
professionally or demonstrate
limited understanding of the
proposed approach or
research topic.

20%
18 - 20 15-17 10 - 14 0 - 9




学霸联盟