Assignment 9

S1 · 7.5 points

Basic requirements

Q1 · Yes / No · 1 point

Can you open the pdf and it’s not blank?

Q2 · Yes / No · 1 point

Is the report anonymous?

S2 · 85 points

Assignment

Q3 · Yes / No · 1 point

Is source code included?

Q4 · Yes / No · 1 point

Is there a Stan code provided that seems reasonable for the problem? The code doesn’t have to be correct, as far as it is somewhat reasonable.

Q5 · Yes / No · 1 point

Is there a reasonable code provided for computing the expected utilities for the six machines? (either as a part of Stan code or as separate R/Python code) You don’t need to check that the code is perfect, but it should look like it’s doing what is asked (not just some arbitrary code).

Q6 · Scale · 1 point

Are the expected utilities computed and reported? (The utility should be of the form XXX or equivalently XXX. The utilities should be roughly XXX, XXX, XXX, XXX, XXX, XXX for the machines 1,2,…,6, respectively. If default settings for stan are used, roughly +/-4 variation due to random error can occur.)

  • No
  • Yes, but results are not correct (e.g. utility computed with wrong formula or samples from wrong distribution used) or some utilities are missing
  • Yes, and all results are correct

Q7 · Scale · 1 point

Are the machines ranked from worst to best? If the utilities were computed correctly, the order of the machines should be: XXX(worst),XXX,XXX,XXX,XXX,XXX(best).

  • No
  • Yes, but the order does not correspond to the reported expected utilities
  • Yes, and all results are correct

Q8 · Scale · 1 point

Is some discussion on the computed values for the expected utilities for the six machines provided? (E.g. [example shown in peergrade]). If there was a mistake in the utility computations it is OK if the discussion is correct with respect to obtained results.

  • No
  • Yes, but the provided discussion does not make sense or does not agree with the obtained results
  • Yes

Q9 · Yes / No · 1 point

Is there a reasonable code provided for computing the expected utility for the new (7th) machine? The code doesn’t have to be correct, as far as it is somewhat reasonable.

Q10 · Scale · 1 point

Is the expected utility for the new (7th) machine computed and reported? (If the utility is formulated as previously, the result should be roughly XXX, roughly +/-4 variation due to random error can occur.)

  • No
  • Yes, but it is wrong (e.g. wrong utility function or samples from wrong distribution)
  • Yes and the result seems plausible

Q11 · Scale · 1 point

Is some discussion provided whether the company should buy a new (7th) machine? (E.g.[example shown in peergrade]). If there was a mistake in the utility computations it is OK if the discussion is correct with respect to obtained results.

  • No
  • Yes, but the provided discussion does not make sense or is does not agree with the obtained results
  • Yes

S3 · 7.5 points

Overall quality of the report

Q12 · Scale · 1 point

Does the report follow the formatting instructions?

  • Not at all
  • Little
  • Mostly
  • Yes

Q13 -

In case the report doesn’t fully follow the formatting instructions, specify the formatting instruction that is not followed. If applicable, specify the page of the report, where this difference in formatting is visible.

Q14 -

Please provide also feedback on the presentation (e.g. text, layout, flow of the responses, figures, figure captions). Part of the course is practicing making data analysis reports. By providing feedback on the report presentation and other students can learn what they can improve or what they already did well. You should be able to provide constructive or positive feedback for all non-empty reports, even if there is nothing to say about the technical correctness of the answers. You can also provide feedback on code.