SECU0058 – Component 2 – Marking Criteria (Example for a PASS)
Introduction The introduction section presents the work in the report, but the content could be
Copyright By PowCoder代写 加微信 powcoder
significantly improved.
Typical issues:
▪ Important points and/or statements about what makes the work interesting,
original and important are either missing, not clear or not convincing;
▪ Minor points have been included when they shouldn’t have;
▪ Some of the points in the introduction are too detailed;
▪ The structure/style could be greatly improved.
Background
information
The background section demonstrates basic ability to review the literature and give
an overview of an area of interest.
Typical issues:
▪ The section only draws upon a small number of papers, or it only demonstrates
limited ability to search for, extract, critically interpret, and synthesize
information relevant to the task;
▪ The table only contains a limited amount of relevant information;
▪ The general framework behind the background section is not described or
justified;
▪ It is not clear why some papers have been prioritised over others;
▪ Structure/style could be greatly improved.
strategies
The section demonstrates basic ability to build on existing work and propose a
more realistic behaviour strategy that can be coded in an ABM.
Typical issues:
▪ The proposed strategies only offer limited improvement compared to the
existing code;
▪ The proposed strategies are too complex/ambitious for this exercise;
▪ The description of the strategies could have been clearer and better
written (incl. structure, style);
▪ There is no clear link between this section and the previous section;
▪ The design/choice of the strategy could have been better justified (e.g., more
convincing arguments and references could have been used).
Implementation A .nlogo file has been provided that shows an attempt has been made to
implement a strategy in Netlogo. While the code works, it only demonstrates basic
programming skills (incl. problem-solving skills, ability to develop a suitable code
architecture, knowledge/use of Netlogo commands).
Typical issues:
▪ The strategies implemented in the code do not match the strategies described in
the previous section;
▪ The strategies are too simple, and the code does not demonstrate the student is
able to implement a reasonably complex strategy (e.g., in-store navigation that
involves going through a shopping list, with no dynamic optimisation of the
trajectory, no unplanned stops, no internal/external stimuli would score 50/100);
▪ The code works but it is difficult to understand it;
▪ The architecture of the code is unnecessarily complicated;
▪ The student failed to use commands that would have simplified the code;
▪ The report does not clearly communicate how the strategies have been
implemented;
▪ There is no justification for the main programming choices that were made.
▪ The presentation of the code in the report focuses on aspects that were not the
most important ones.
Results and
This section only demonstrates a basic ability to design and implement a simulation
research method (incl. save and analyse data from multiple simulations, carry out
sensitivity analysis) and report scientific results.
Typical issues:
▪ A limited number of indicators are described and/or the analysis is very basic;
▪ Indicators are not consistent with the strategies that were implemented, or it is
not clear why these indicators have been selected;
▪ The design of the simulation experiments could have been more clearly
presented and justified;
▪ Better simulation tools (e.g., Netlogo’s behaviour space module) could have been
▪ The presentation of the results could be greatly improved with, for instance,
more/more adequate graphs or statistics;
▪ There is no comparison between the (values of the) indicators in the background
information and those in the simulation;
▪ Some inaccuracies in the presentation of the results.
Discussion This section demonstrates basic ability to interpret the results, extract important
points from the results, and use the results to support a relevant set of arguments.
Typical issues:
▪ The discussion is poorly organised and/or not focused on the central topic
▪ Fundamental scientific/methodological errors;
▪ Inaccuracies in the interpretation of the results;
▪ Misunderstanding of the limitations;
▪ There is a reflection on how realistic the simulated behaviour is, but it does not
draw enough upon the literature;
▪ Some of the statements are not supported by the data;
▪ Poor use of space.
Conclusions The conclusion includes one or two important recommendations that are
consistent with the results in the report. However, the content could be
significantly improved.
Typical issues:
▪ Recommendations are missing, not directly derived from the work, unclear, or
not convincing;
▪ The conclusion does not clearly show why the selected recommendations are
important;
▪ Recommendations are not properly placed into context;
▪ Minor points have been included when they shouldn’t have;
▪ Some of the points in the conclusions are too detailed;
▪ The structure/style could be greatly improved.
程序代写 CS代考 加微信: powcoder QQ: 1823890830 Email: powcoder@163.com