Due: Thursday, May 3, 1:00 PM
Each group will make a final presentation about their software. Each presentation should discuss a breadth of topics described below. Groups are invited to expand on these topics, using these as a general guide, or to provide their own interpretation for these topics, but the overall scope should not be narrower than described here.
-
Describe the physical problem being modeled by the team, including:
- sketches/images of the physical system
- equations (including boundary conditions) that provide a mathematical model for that system
- definition of variables
- as appropriate, variations of the equations for different stages in your development (e.g. steady state vs transient)
-
Software description
- difference equations being solved numerically, including matrix formulation
- a block diagram that shows the relationship between functions
- a description of important data structures
- for each function
- a docstring
- a conceptual description of tests: what cases did you test
-
Simulation results
- show important examples of results generated by your software
- discuss whether these results match your expectations
-
Community Review
- How was the work divided among your team?
- Discuss success of synchronous vs. asynchronous work
- Examples of productive/constructive review in PR
-
Looking forward
- Discuss how you might improve your software to achieve better results
- Discuss how you might change your software for better readability and/or maintainability
- Discuss how you might like to enhance your software to solve additional/different problems
- If you could start over, how would you change the software development process for greater success?
Every member of the team should present, and should present a roughly equal fraction of the total material. You are free to allocate topics to team members as you like. Your presentation should be less than 30 minutes, but I expect them to be at least 20 minutes or so, to cover all the above material.
Topics | Strong | Adequate | Fair | None |
---|---|---|---|---|
Were all the topics covered? | 1.25 | 1 | 0.7 | 0 |
Were all team members engaged in the presentation? | 1.25 | 1 | 0.7 | 0 |
Visual quality of presentation materials | 1.25 | 1 | 0.7 | 0 |
Oral presentation quality | 1.25 | 1 | 0.7 | 0 |
- All slides are clearly readable, including legends, axes and labels on graphics
- Graphics are logically arranged and support presentation
- Aesthetic style is supportive of presentation and not distracting
- clarity: volume & annunciation
- engagement: enthusiasm/energy and eye contact
- fluidity: familiar with topic and able to speak about it without hesitation