CS 6354: Graduate Computer Architecture

1 Paper reviews grading

2 points for each paper review (total of 4 if two papers for that day).

General guidelines:

• Do not deduct credit for poor English. (You may indicate it in the comment.)
• Do not deduct credit for failing to suggest something to discuss in class.
• Do not deduct credit for identifying multiple insights or weaknesses so long as each is sane.

1.1 0 points

• Answers to most of the questions are missing.
• Answers that are provided could be provided without much more than the title of the paper.
• Answers that are provided are not comprehensible.

1.2 1 point

• At least one answer suggests a major misunderstanding of the paper.
• Weakness suggested is very superficial.
• Rather than providing the insight supported by the paper, the student provided a summary of the experiments the paper authors performed.
• The evidence the student suggests supports their insight does not, or the student failed to identify any evidence.

1.3 2 points

• All questions have a mostly reasonable answer.
• The identified insight is something one could learn from reading the paper, regardless of whether it is a primary result of the paper.
• The identified evidence is present in the paper. It is okay if the evidence is weak if that’s the best available evidence in the paper. (For example, if the insight the student identifies is primarily supported by the authors’ professional experience rather than an actual study.)
• The weakness identified could substantially affect the technical results of the paper or a reader’s ability to believe/understand those results.