Please, wait while we are validating your browser
The day before the proposal review session in class, you will need to submit a 1-page project proposal. This proposal will then be reviewed in class by your peers, and a proportion of your grade will be determined by the peer review. However, after the review you will have the opportunity to submit a revised proposal based on the feedback you received.
A key aspect is that you are in charge. The idea is to discuss a computer vision problem that you might encounter in your future career (be it in academia, industry, or government). You then propose a solution, implement it, and describe it in a mini-conference paper. Projects have to be done in teams of 2 to 3 students.
As with all things in life, while you are firmly in charge, there are external factors that will determine the success of your project. In this course we will simulate the processes by which you later might attempt to get funding for your project (proposal review) and publish the results (mini-conferences).
Also, a loose constraint imposed is that you will have to implement something and compare it to another algorithm achieving the same goal, and that the topic roughly correlates with what we discuss in class. What you propose to implement can be an existing technique, a variation on something existing, or something completely new. However, what you compare it to has to be something described in the literature.
The one-page proposal should consist of a title - no author- and five sections:
Problem addressed and its importance
⁃ poor: does not mention problem or does not say why it is important
⁃ acceptable: problem is tied to societal needs and backed up with reasons
⁃ exceptional: succeeds in really convincing the reader (way beyond lip service)
Related work in this area
⁃ poor: does not mention related work or fails to back up with references
⁃ acceptable: mentions at least references and how they attack problem
⁃ exceptional: describes several references and in addition show where they are deficient
Description of what you will implement
⁃ poor: just says that paper X will be implemented
⁃ acceptable: is specific about what exactly will be implemented
⁃ exceptional: in addition discusses why what is proposed makes sense
Description of how you will evaluate the results
⁃ poor: evaluation of results is clearly not thought through
⁃ acceptable: is specific with which other paper results will be compared and how
⁃ exceptional: in addition speculates about where the proposed approach will shine
⁃ poor: no references or poorly/inconsistent formatting, or spelling mistakes
⁃ acceptable: references are consistently formatted and no spelling problems
⁃ exceptional: in addition adhere to publication standards, includes all relevant info
The preferred authoring tools for both proposal and paper are latex or lyx.
Deliverable: a one-page PDF containing the proposal, with a title to identify the proposal but no identifying information about the authors. The review will be done double-blind. All team-members should submit exactly the same PDF, and list the team in the text-box of the T-square assignment page.