Here you will find the instructions for the peer-reviews of HW2.

Number of reviews

Each student will be assigned two assignments to review. The reviews are handled through Studium, and they will be distributed on May 18 11:59.

Review:

For each reviewed assignment, the reviewer must submit through Studium a generic text comment on the assignment, as well as numerical scores for each of the questions according to the assignment's rubric (this should be displayed in the review page of each assignment).

For the numerical scores, consider the following allocation of points, as a function of the quality of the solution (i.e., how correct it is):

	No Marks	Half Marks	Full Marks
Quality range	0 - 40%	51 - 79%	80% - 100%
Score (%)	0%	50%	100%
Qualitative description	Incorrect, or very incomplete, or slightly correct but with many errors.	Mostly correct, but with a few errors.	Correct, possibly with minor typos.

The qualitative description provides some general guideline to the grading, but it is left to each student to fine-tune the quality range.

Below you find some additional instructions for each type of exercise.

Pen-and-paper exercises
Judge the clarity and consistency of the argumentation. Is it reasonable? Is the argumentation well supported by the theory?

Implementation tasks:
Run the code and evaluate if the result matches what is expected. Does the code run? Does it give the expected result? Do you get an error from the code? Do you notice a bug in the code?

Task 2 and Task 3.2:

For these tasks more precises grading criteria are given in the notebook. Follow these!

Deadline:

The reviews should be submitted through Studium before the deadline, May 24 23:59.