CS 197 Review of Presentations

1
CS 197 Review of Presentations
Aditya Mathur, Instructor CS 197 Freshman Honors
Seminar

1. Presentation

a. Slides
b. Delivery
2. Depth
3. Miscellaneous
November 25, 2002
2
General Remarks

1. Presentation

a. Slides
Brief
Figures preferred over text
Avoid complex text entry.
Animate figures where possible
Colors good contrast
Colors good contrast
3
General Remarks (continued)
b. Delivery
Avoid reading from notes
Dynamism helps but is a matter of personal taste
Speech must be in sync with the material on the
slide
Avoid basically like uh .
No drinking or eating
Hands out of pockets
Maintain eye contact (not with one but with the
audience)
Speak loud enough
4
General Remarks (continued)
2. Depth
Decide on what to focus
State and explain objective
Define terms used
Use example(s) to explain
Avoid material that most in the audience will
likely know
Clearly state research questions
What has been done? What has not been done?
5
Team 1 Holographic Memories

1. Presentation

a. Slides
Well organized
b. Delivery
Excellent
2. Depth
Good job, informative, in-depth into holographic
storage, noise/error correction, interfacing-well
done good comparison between conventional and
holographic memories.
6
Team 2 Quantum Computing

1. Presentation

a. Slides
Lot of graphics not large enough, too much text
neat spiral graphics
b. Delivery
Reading off-the slides
2. Depth
Good depth and breadth
7
Team 3 Nanotechnology

1. Presentation

a. Slides
Blended well
Sometimes too much material (everything on
slide!)
b. Delivery
Not on time
Second presentation significant improvement
2. Depth
8
Team 4 Quantum Computing

1. Presentation

a. Slides
Excellent
b. Delivery
Watch out for Umms seemed unsure of material
memorized?
2. Depth
Good choice (Shors algorithm)
Could have walked thru an example
Factoring unclear
9
Team 5 Quantum Computing

1. Presentation

a. Slides
Excellent
b. Delivery
Well done.
2. Depth
Parallel universe idea unclear
Reversible vs. non-reversible gate good.
Quantum adder notion left unclear
Team 4 review too short!
10
Team 6 Nanotechnology

1. Presentation

a. Slides
Good
b. Delivery
Too much reading third presentation was the best
of the three.
2. Depth
Good breadth
Review from Team 3 not available.
11
Team 7 Cryptography

1. Presentation

a. Slides
Excellent
b. Delivery
Excellent
2. Depth
Excellent
12
Team 8 AI

1. Presentation

a. Slides
Not more than 1 slide on Loebner prize
b. Delivery
Third presentation best of three.
Fuzzy logic good but went over it too fast.
2. Depth
Min-max trees good Details of Alice very good.
13
Final Words

1. Research is interesting and needed.

2. Useful and rewarding
3. You get to do new things! Develop new
techniques. Evaluate existing methods and products
Questions?