Research Project

The research project is designed to meet the majority of course objectives. As such, it represents a significant portion of your grade. You should take this process seriously and meet the time deadlines. Work which is not submitted by a deadline is subject to a score of 0 for that work.

For this project you are to select an topic of current research within Computer Science and perform in depth research on the current state of the art for that topic. This project will consist of a number of components which are described below.

All normal restrictions on plagiarism apply. The penalty for plagiarism or other violations of the code of conduct will be failure in the class.

Weekly Meetings

Due Date: Every Week.

Rubric::

Item Weight Outstanding Good Acceptable Poor Failing

Attendance 33% Attends Every session Misses 2-4 sessions, but provides advanced notice of cancellation Misses 2-4 sessions but does not provide notice of cancellation Misses more than 4 sessions but provides notice of cancellation Misses more than 6 sessions

Preparation 67% Presents evidence of accomplishments related to the project and has questions, comments or other motivation for interaction. Presents evidence of accomplishments related to the project or has questions, comments or other motivation for interaction. Has questions or concerns about project Presents evidence of overwhelming work load but can discuss project Has nothing to discuss

Item	Weight	Outstanding	Good	Acceptable	Poor	Failing
Attendance	33%	Attends Every session	Misses 2-4 sessions, but provides advanced notice of cancellation	Misses 2-4 sessions but does not provide notice of cancellation	Misses more than 4 sessions but provides notice of cancellation	Misses more than 6 sessions
Preparation	67%	Presents evidence of accomplishments related to the project and has questions, comments or other motivation for interaction.	Presents evidence of accomplishments related to the project or has questions, comments or other motivation for interaction.	Has questions or concerns about project	Presents evidence of overwhelming work load but can discuss project	Has nothing to discuss

You should contact me and schedule a 15 minute time slot when we will meet regularly to discuss your project. This time is outside of class, but we will use this time in place of several classes which will be canceled this semester. This includes 2/7 and 4/25 as well as the Friday before PACISE (Early April)

These sessions will allow for interaction, and provide a certain amount of pressure to make regular progress on your project. You should be prepared to demonstrate that you have made progress and be prepared to ask questions.

Topic Proposal

Due Date: Third week.

Rubric: (Composite of many sources)

Item Weight Outstanding Good Acceptable Poor Failing

Title and Abstract 10% The title is informative and reflects the content of the project and the abstract provides a concise summary of the area of study. The title and abstract are relevant and offer details about the proposed are of study. The title and abstract provide a general description of the specialized area of study. The title and abstract provide a description of the area of study. No title or abstract

Introduction 15% Introduction provides motivation for investigation, summarizes important ideas and provides an overview of literature in proposed area of study. Introduction suggests motivation for investigation, discusses some important ideas and introduces some literature in proposed area of study. Introduction provides an overview of the area of investigation, discusses ideas or introduces some of the literature in the proposed area of study. Introduction provides an overview of a general area of computing. Sources are questionable or missing. No introduction

Background 15% Background material is complete, concise, and relevant. The specific area of interest is related to a general area of computing research. Sufficient relevant references are provided. Background material is relatively complete and mostly relevant. The presentation is focused. Relent references are provided. Background material provides a general overview of an area of computing. References are provided. A general discussion of computing and the history of a general area of computing research is provided. Some references are provided. No background material

Area of Concentration 20% A concise and complete discussion of relevant work in the area of concentration is provided. Specialized terms are defined, relevant open questions are presented and motivation for research are included. A discussion of relevant work in the area of concentration is provided. Some terms are defined, an open question is presented and justification of the topic is provided. A general discussion of the area of concentration is provided. A vague discussion of the area of concentration is provided. Discussion lacks focus. No description of area of concentration

Project 20% The project is described in sufficient detail to believe the project can be accomplished. Resources needed, directions taken and an overview work to be done are discussed in detail. The project is described in detail, and resources, direction or overview of work is discussed A description of the project is provided, some resources needed, directions taken or work to be done is discussed. A vague outline of a project is presented. Some consideration of direction, resources or work is provided No project description

Literature Review 20% Sufficient credible sources are presented to indicate a serious literature review has begun. Sources are cited and critically evaluated. Sufficient credible sources are presented to indicate a serious literature review has begun. Sources are cited. Some sources are presented and cited. Few sources are listed, no evaluation of sources is in evidence. No literature review

Item	Weight	Outstanding	Good	Acceptable	Poor	Failing
Title and Abstract	10%	The title is informative and reflects the content of the project and the abstract provides a concise summary of the area of study.	The title and abstract are relevant and offer details about the proposed are of study.	The title and abstract provide a general description of the specialized area of study.	The title and abstract provide a description of the area of study.	No title or abstract
Introduction	15%	Introduction provides motivation for investigation, summarizes important ideas and provides an overview of literature in proposed area of study.	Introduction suggests motivation for investigation, discusses some important ideas and introduces some literature in proposed area of study.	Introduction provides an overview of the area of investigation, discusses ideas or introduces some of the literature in the proposed area of study.	Introduction provides an overview of a general area of computing. Sources are questionable or missing.	No introduction
Background	15%	Background material is complete, concise, and relevant. The specific area of interest is related to a general area of computing research. Sufficient relevant references are provided.	Background material is relatively complete and mostly relevant. The presentation is focused. Relent references are provided.	Background material provides a general overview of an area of computing. References are provided.	A general discussion of computing and the history of a general area of computing research is provided. Some references are provided.	No background material
Area of Concentration	20%	A concise and complete discussion of relevant work in the area of concentration is provided. Specialized terms are defined, relevant open questions are presented and motivation for research are included.	A discussion of relevant work in the area of concentration is provided. Some terms are defined, an open question is presented and justification of the topic is provided.	A general discussion of the area of concentration is provided.	A vague discussion of the area of concentration is provided. Discussion lacks focus.	No description of area of concentration
Project	20%	The project is described in sufficient detail to believe the project can be accomplished. Resources needed, directions taken and an overview work to be done are discussed in detail.	The project is described in detail, and resources, direction or overview of work is discussed	A description of the project is provided, some resources needed, directions taken or work to be done is discussed.	A vague outline of a project is presented. Some consideration of direction, resources or work is provided	No project description
Literature Review	20%	Sufficient credible sources are presented to indicate a serious literature review has begun. Sources are cited and critically evaluated.	Sufficient credible sources are presented to indicate a serious literature review has begun. Sources are cited.	Some sources are presented and cited.	Few sources are listed, no evaluation of sources is in evidence.	No literature review

NOTE: in addition, the written material rubric will be applied.

You should submit a description of your proposed research project. This should include a description of the general area of computation and your specialized area, a discussion of the project portion, a draft of the annotated bibliography and an outline of the paper. This is due Feb. 7^th. You should submit both an electronic copy and a paper copy.

Proposal Presentation

Due Date: Fourth week

Rubric: (Revised from a rubric provided by Professor Hillman.)

Item Weight Outstanding Good Acceptable Poor Failing

Introduction 5% The introduction presents the overall topic and draws the audience into the presentation. The introduction is clear and coherent and relates to the topic. The introduction shows some structure but does not create a strong sense of what is to follow. The introduction fails to orient the audience. There is no introduction.

Organization and Content 15% The content is written clearly and concisely with a logical progression of ideas and supporting information. Information is accurate. The content is written with a logical progression of ideas and supporting information. Information is accurate. The content is correct and complete. There are some issues with organization which impact the sense of purpose. The content is vague in conveying a point of view and does not create a strong sense of purpose. Some information is incorrect or irrelevant. The content lacks a clear point of view and logical sequence of information. Information is incorrect, incomplete or irrelevant. Sequencing of ideas is incomplete.

Knowledge of the Topic 15% The presenter has a theoretical understanding of the topic. Is able to discuss and elaborate with ease on theoretical questions. The presenter has a good understanding of the topic. Is able to discuss and elaborate with ease on application type questions. The presenter has overall knowledge of the topic. Is able to answer questions involving understanding. The presenter has a basic knowledge of the topic, can only answer simple questions related to definitions/basic knowledge. The presenter does not grasp the topic, is unable to answer simple questions.

Creativity 10% The presenter engages the audience, integrating presentation material and other media as needed. The presenter uses presentation material to reinforce discussion. Interacts with audience. The presenter occasionally refers to notes or presentation material for guidance, but can not expand beyond prepared material. Makes eye contact with audience but has limited audience interaction. The presenter relies heavily on presentation material, occasional interaction with audience. The presenter reads directly from notes or other presentation material. There is no interaction with the audience.

Writing Mechanics 15% Presentation has no errors in spelling, capitalization, usage or grammar. Presentation has infrequent errors in spelling, capitalization, usage or grammar. Presentation has few errors in spelling, capitalization, usage and grammar. Presentation has multiple errors in spelling, capitalization, usage and grammar. Presentation has many errors in spelling, capitalization, usage and grammar which repeatedly distract from the presentation.

Discussion 15% The presenter encouraged interaction and was well prepared for questions on key elements. The presenter encouraged interaction and answered questions. The presenter was able to answer questions, but did not encourage discussion. The presenter was unable to answer questions related to the presentation. The presenter discouraged interaction. The presenter did not allow audience interaction.

Presentation Material 15% Presentation material is clear, well organized, free from distractions and easy to read. Graphics and useful and support the point. The presenter is well acquainted with the presentation material. Material is organized but contains occasional flaws: irrelevant or missing graphics, distractions, large blocks of text, extraneous material. Material is organized, but frequently includes flaws: irrelevant or missing graphics, many distractions, large blocks of text. Presentation material is poorly organized, regularly contains flaws: few or irrelevant graphics, large blocks of text. Transitions are distracting. No prepared presentation material is employed.

Presentation Mechanics 10% The allocated time was used effectively, adequate time was available for discussion. The presenter was comfortable with the presentation technology employed and fully utilized the media available. The presentation was submitted on time, in the proper format. The allocated time was used appropriately, some time was available for discussion. The presenter employed presentation technology with little difficulty. Minor problems with techniques. Use of additional technology may be recommended. The presentation was completed in the allotted time, limited time was available for interaction. The use of presentation technology was acceptable but could use improvement. The presentation was not completed in the allocated time. The presenter experienced major problems employing presentation technology. The presentation was not completed in the allocated time. Presentation technology was not employed.

Item	Weight	Outstanding	Good	Acceptable	Poor	Failing
Introduction	5%	The introduction presents the overall topic and draws the audience into the presentation.	The introduction is clear and coherent and relates to the topic.	The introduction shows some structure but does not create a strong sense of what is to follow.	The introduction fails to orient the audience.	There is no introduction.
Organization and Content	15%	The content is written clearly and concisely with a logical progression of ideas and supporting information. Information is accurate.	The content is written with a logical progression of ideas and supporting information. Information is accurate.	The content is correct and complete. There are some issues with organization which impact the sense of purpose.	The content is vague in conveying a point of view and does not create a strong sense of purpose. Some information is incorrect or irrelevant.	The content lacks a clear point of view and logical sequence of information. Information is incorrect, incomplete or irrelevant. Sequencing of ideas is incomplete.
Knowledge of the Topic	15%	The presenter has a theoretical understanding of the topic. Is able to discuss and elaborate with ease on theoretical questions.	The presenter has a good understanding of the topic. Is able to discuss and elaborate with ease on application type questions.	The presenter has overall knowledge of the topic. Is able to answer questions involving understanding.	The presenter has a basic knowledge of the topic, can only answer simple questions related to definitions/basic knowledge.	The presenter does not grasp the topic, is unable to answer simple questions.
Creativity	10%	The presenter engages the audience, integrating presentation material and other media as needed.	The presenter uses presentation material to reinforce discussion. Interacts with audience.	The presenter occasionally refers to notes or presentation material for guidance, but can not expand beyond prepared material. Makes eye contact with audience but has limited audience interaction.	The presenter relies heavily on presentation material, occasional interaction with audience.	The presenter reads directly from notes or other presentation material. There is no interaction with the audience.
Writing Mechanics	15%	Presentation has no errors in spelling, capitalization, usage or grammar.	Presentation has infrequent errors in spelling, capitalization, usage or grammar.	Presentation has few errors in spelling, capitalization, usage and grammar.	Presentation has multiple errors in spelling, capitalization, usage and grammar.	Presentation has many errors in spelling, capitalization, usage and grammar which repeatedly distract from the presentation.
Discussion	15%	The presenter encouraged interaction and was well prepared for questions on key elements.	The presenter encouraged interaction and answered questions.	The presenter was able to answer questions, but did not encourage discussion.	The presenter was unable to answer questions related to the presentation. The presenter discouraged interaction.	The presenter did not allow audience interaction.
Presentation Material	15%	Presentation material is clear, well organized, free from distractions and easy to read. Graphics and useful and support the point. The presenter is well acquainted with the presentation material.	Material is organized but contains occasional flaws: irrelevant or missing graphics, distractions, large blocks of text, extraneous material.	Material is organized, but frequently includes flaws: irrelevant or missing graphics, many distractions, large blocks of text.	Presentation material is poorly organized, regularly contains flaws: few or irrelevant graphics, large blocks of text. Transitions are distracting.	No prepared presentation material is employed.
Presentation Mechanics	10%	The allocated time was used effectively, adequate time was available for discussion. The presenter was comfortable with the presentation technology employed and fully utilized the media available. The presentation was submitted on time, in the proper format.	The allocated time was used appropriately, some time was available for discussion. The presenter employed presentation technology with little difficulty. Minor problems with techniques. Use of additional technology may be recommended.	The presentation was completed in the allotted time, limited time was available for interaction. The use of presentation technology was acceptable but could use improvement.	The presentation was not completed in the allocated time. The presenter experienced major problems employing presentation technology.	The presentation was not completed in the allocated time. Presentation technology was not employed.

On Feb. 10^th or 12^th you must give a 10 minute presentation on your proposed topic. Presentation slots must be reserved through your instructor on a first come first served basis. Your presentation should include an overview of the subject area and the specific topic which you have selected, a discussion of your proposed implementation, and a quick look a the resources available. It should provide sufficient detail to show that you have an understanding of your topic and your project can be completed in the time allowed. This presentation should be assessable to someone with an undergraduate degree in computer science.

This presentation will be given to the class only, it will not be open to the public. You should prepare high quality presentation aids. You should submit an electronic copy of your presentation slides by noon on the day of your presentation. If you have specialized presentation requirements, you must arrange for these in advance.

Time Presenter Topic

2/10: 1:00 Mr. Key

2/10: 1:15 Mr Hamilton Real-Time Procedural Generation of Interrelated Content

2/10: 1:30 Mr. Staff

2/12: 1:00 Mr. Torres

2/12: 1:15 Mr. Rhodes Evaluating Characteristics of Existing Triangular Meshing Packages

2/12: 1:30 Mr. Rudzinski

Time	Presenter	Topic
2/10: 1:00	Mr. Key
2/10: 1:15	Mr Hamilton	Real-Time Procedural Generation of Interrelated Content
2/10: 1:30	Mr. Staff
2/12: 1:00	Mr. Torres
2/12: 1:15	Mr. Rhodes	Evaluating Characteristics of Existing Triangular Meshing Packages
2/12: 1:30	Mr. Rudzinski

Annotated Bibliography

Due Date(s): Third week, Thirteenth week.

Rubric: (Revised from a rubric posted at Purdue

Item Weight Outstanding Good Acceptable Poor Failing

Source Selection 20% Sources cited are relevant to the topic. Sources indicate a complete review of literature. Few if any additional sources will be required. Most sources are relevant to the topic. Additional sources may be required but a thorough investing of the literature is indicated. Some sources are irrelevant. Additional sources are required. Relevant sources present indicate a strong literature review has begun. Most sources are not relevant to the topic. Significant additional review of research is required. Sources present indicate trivial literature review has occurred. Sources are not relevant to the topic. No indication of a literature review is present.

Credibility 20% All sources are from credible, scholarly material. Sources are timely. Most sources are from credible, scholarly material. Most sources are timely. Some sources are from credible, scholarly material. Some sources may be outdated. Few sources are from credible, scholarly material. Sources are outdated. Sources lack credibility. Focus on popular media, blogs or other unrefereed material.

Annotations 20% All annotations succinctly and comprehensively describe the source material. Annotations offer insight into the source material. Most annotations are succinct, and comprehensively describe source material. Some annotations may be too short or too long. Source material is described but annotations lack insight. Few annotations adequately describe the source material. Annotations offer little or no insight. Annotations are trivial, missing or lack insight. Annotations do not describe the source material.

Evaluation 20% All evaluations explain why the source was chosen, demonstrate a clear understanding of the value of the source. Most evaluations explain the selection of the source. Some evaluations explain why the source was selected, however some sources lack critical evaluation. Most sources lack evaluation, sources are simply listed and summarized. Evaluations are trivial. All evaluations are trivial or missing.

Mechanics 20% The document is free from grammatical, punctuation and spelling errors. Proper citation style used (ACM or IEEE). The document has occasional errors in grammar, punctuation or spelling. Proper citation style used (ACM or IEEE). The document has frequent errors in grammar, punctuation and spelling. It contains minor, but consistent errors in citation style. The document has distracting errors in grammar, punctuation and spelling. It contains inconsistent errors in citation style or an unacceptable documented citation style is used. Significant errors render document useless. No documented citation style is used.

Item	Weight	Outstanding	Good	Acceptable	Poor	Failing
Source Selection	20%	Sources cited are relevant to the topic. Sources indicate a complete review of literature. Few if any additional sources will be required.	Most sources are relevant to the topic. Additional sources may be required but a thorough investing of the literature is indicated.	Some sources are irrelevant. Additional sources are required. Relevant sources present indicate a strong literature review has begun.	Most sources are not relevant to the topic. Significant additional review of research is required. Sources present indicate trivial literature review has occurred.	Sources are not relevant to the topic. No indication of a literature review is present.
Credibility	20%	All sources are from credible, scholarly material. Sources are timely.	Most sources are from credible, scholarly material. Most sources are timely.	Some sources are from credible, scholarly material. Some sources may be outdated.	Few sources are from credible, scholarly material. Sources are outdated.	Sources lack credibility. Focus on popular media, blogs or other unrefereed material.
Annotations	20%	All annotations succinctly and comprehensively describe the source material. Annotations offer insight into the source material.	Most annotations are succinct, and comprehensively describe source material.	Some annotations may be too short or too long. Source material is described but annotations lack insight.	Few annotations adequately describe the source material. Annotations offer little or no insight.	Annotations are trivial, missing or lack insight. Annotations do not describe the source material.
Evaluation	20%	All evaluations explain why the source was chosen, demonstrate a clear understanding of the value of the source.	Most evaluations explain the selection of the source.	Some evaluations explain why the source was selected, however some sources lack critical evaluation.	Most sources lack evaluation, sources are simply listed and summarized. Evaluations are trivial.	All evaluations are trivial or missing.
Mechanics	20%	The document is free from grammatical, punctuation and spelling errors. Proper citation style used (ACM or IEEE).	The document has occasional errors in grammar, punctuation or spelling. Proper citation style used (ACM or IEEE).	The document has frequent errors in grammar, punctuation and spelling. It contains minor, but consistent errors in citation style.	The document has distracting errors in grammar, punctuation and spelling. It contains inconsistent errors in citation style or an unacceptable documented citation style is used.	Significant errors render document useless. No documented citation style is used.

You must create an annotated bibliography for your project. It should include a comprehensive review of the literature for your selected topic. This is a separate document from the project proposal but should contain the same sources.

A draft copy of your annotated bibliography is due with your proposal and implementation draft on Feb 7^th at class time. This need not be complete but should show sufficient resources are available, and that sufficient work has been conducted to expect that the project is reasonable and can be completed.

A final copy of your annotated bibliography is due with the final copy of your paper on May 28^th.

Draft Paper

Due Date: Eighth week.

Rubric: See topic proposal rubric above.

Provide a draft copy of your paper for instructor review. This is due at class time March 14^th. A paper copy must be submitted.

Final Paper

Due Date: Thirteenth week.

Rubric: See topic proposal rubric above.

Your final paper should be of sufficient length to cover your topic thoroughly. I would expect between 15 and 30 pages, double spaced, inclusive. The paper should include, but not be limited to:

An abstract
An introduction to the general area
An introduction to the topic.
A discussion of the state of the current state of the art for this topic.
A discussion of your implementation.
Future directions and conclusions.
A bibliography. This is not the annotated bibliography.

Your final paper is due in both electronic and print form by the beginning of class on April 28^th.

Topic Poster

Due Date: Thirteenth week, Fourteenth Week.

Rubric: (Revised from a presentation rubric for Michigan State University.

Item Weight Outstanding Good Acceptable Poor Failing

Style/Presentation 25% Poster contains succinct text and clear graphics. Graphics and text are balanced. The poster invites viewer participation. Poster contains well chosen text and graphics. Color and font selection enhance presentation. Poster in neat. Poster contains a mixture of text and graphics. Color and font selection do not detract from presentation. Poster is wordy, contains few or no relevant graphics. Colors clash or render poster difficult to read, font size is small. Poster consists of large blocks of text. Graphics are irrelevant or distracting. Colors and font size render poster unreadable. Poster is sloppy.

Organization and Flow 25% There is a clear flow through the poster. Users can understand the work without the author present. Sections are labeled and there is a clear flow through the poster. Some interaction with the author is required to understand the work. Sections are labeled, but the flow is ambiguous. Interaction with the author is required to understand the work. The poster is disorganized, there is little or no indication of flow. The poster is incomprehensible, or simply a large block of text.

Content 25% All required content components are present, accurate and grammatically correct. All required content components are present, accurate with few grammatical errors. All required content components are present, minor inaccuracies or occasional grammatical errors. Some required content components are missing, major inaccuracies, or grammatical errors distract from presentation. Most required content components are missing.

Interaction 25% Presenter thoroughly discusses the topic, fully utilizing the poster as a presentation resource. Poster is an integrated portion of the presentation. Presenter thoroughly discusses the topic, frequently utilizing the poster as a presentation resource. Poster is strongly related to presentation. Presenter discusses the topic, partially utilizing the poster as a presentation resource. Poster aides in presentation. Presenter presents the topic, occasionally referring to the poster. Few items on the poster are useful in the discussion. Presenter presents the topic without referring to poster.

Item	Weight	Outstanding	Good	Acceptable	Poor	Failing
Style/Presentation	25%	Poster contains succinct text and clear graphics. Graphics and text are balanced. The poster invites viewer participation.	Poster contains well chosen text and graphics. Color and font selection enhance presentation. Poster in neat.	Poster contains a mixture of text and graphics. Color and font selection do not detract from presentation.	Poster is wordy, contains few or no relevant graphics. Colors clash or render poster difficult to read, font size is small.	Poster consists of large blocks of text. Graphics are irrelevant or distracting. Colors and font size render poster unreadable. Poster is sloppy.
Organization and Flow	25%	There is a clear flow through the poster. Users can understand the work without the author present.	Sections are labeled and there is a clear flow through the poster. Some interaction with the author is required to understand the work.	Sections are labeled, but the flow is ambiguous. Interaction with the author is required to understand the work.	The poster is disorganized, there is little or no indication of flow.	The poster is incomprehensible, or simply a large block of text.
Content	25%	All required content components are present, accurate and grammatically correct.	All required content components are present, accurate with few grammatical errors.	All required content components are present, minor inaccuracies or occasional grammatical errors.	Some required content components are missing, major inaccuracies, or grammatical errors distract from presentation.	Most required content components are missing.
Interaction	25%	Presenter thoroughly discusses the topic, fully utilizing the poster as a presentation resource. Poster is an integrated portion of the presentation.	Presenter thoroughly discusses the topic, frequently utilizing the poster as a presentation resource. Poster is strongly related to presentation.	Presenter discusses the topic, partially utilizing the poster as a presentation resource. Poster aides in presentation.	Presenter presents the topic, occasionally referring to the poster. Few items on the poster are useful in the discussion.	Presenter presents the topic without referring to poster.

You are to produce a poster as part of your project. This poster must be finished by the thirteenth week to allow time Ms. Warner to print all of the posters.We will hold a poster session on May 2^th during class time. We will invite the public to attend these sessions.

Your poster should include (but not limited to ):

An introduction to the topic.
A discussion of the work you have done.
A summary of your results.
A description of future work.
A bibliography.

A copy of the poster must be submitted by class time on April 25^th.

Topic Presentation

Due Date: Fourteenth or Fifteenth week.

Rubric: See proposal presentation rubric above.

You will have 20 minutes to present your topic to your classmates and other invited guests. This presentation should be aimed at your peers, specifically people with a general background in computer science. It should include, but not be limited to: background material, discuss the current state of the art, discuss your implementation, and present directions for further investigation.

You should prepare appropriate aids to presentation, this can include presentation software, live demonstrations.

Time is critical. You will have 20 minutes for the presentation so it should be well prepared and planned. There will be 5 minutes available for audience questions, which you should be prepared to address.

An abstract of your talk is due by class time April 28^th. You should sign up for a presentation slot when you submit your abstract.

Date Time Presenter Topic
5/5 1:00 - 1:25 TBA TBA

5/5 1:30 - 1:50 TBA TBA

5/7 12:30 - 1:00 TBA TBA

5/7 1:00 - 1:30 TBA TBA

5/7 1:30 - 2:00 TBA TBA

5/7 2:00 - 2:30 TBA TBA

Date	Time	Presenter	Topic
5/5	1:00 - 1:25	TBA	TBA
5/5	1:30 - 1:50	TBA	TBA
5/7	12:30 - 1:00	TBA	TBA
5/7	1:00 - 1:30	TBA	TBA
5/7	1:30 - 2:00	TBA	TBA
5/7	2:00 - 2:30	TBA	TBA

Project Implementation

Due Date: Third week, Fourteenth week.

Rubric: TBD.

You are to implement/prove/create/improve some portion of the work involved with your project. This can be very open, but should be discussed with the instructor. It should demonstrate an understanding of some reasonably new aspect of the topic you are investigating. The implementation should be sufficiently accomplished to be presentable, in some form.

A implementation proposal is due with your project proposal on Feb. 14^th. This should be a several paragraph write up of what you intend to implement.

Your final implementation is due May 9^th. Submission depends on what was done and should be discussed with the instructor.