Final Project
Due dates (all at 5pm) are posted on the schedule.
The objective of the final project is to explore topics in validation in greater depth than is permitted in class. The choice of topic is up to you, but it should be related to the general themes of the course. As part of the project, you should:
- describe an approach (existing or newly developed),
- apply the approach to a problem of interest, and
- analyze the performance of the approach according to a set of metrics.
Your final project may be done in any programming language, and you may use any libraries or software available to you. Should your compute requirements exceed the capacity of your personal machines, we recommend using FarmShare.
Considerations When Selecting a Topic
You topic may be related to your graduate research or another class project (so long as permission is granted by the instructor of your other class); however, you must make the relationship to your other work clear in your proposal and final paper and describe how you have extended this research for this class.
It is important to consider the models and/or simulators that exist for the system (including the decision-making agent) you would like to validate. We highly recommend selecting a system with an existing simulator or model or selecting a system that you can easily model yourself. We don’t want you to spend 90% of the time setting up the model and simulator only to have 10% of the time left to focus on the validation aspect of the project! We have compiled a list of existing models and simulators as a starting point (your model does not have to come from this list).
If you are having difficulty selecting a topic, feel free to talk to the course staff during office hours or post to Ed.
Collaboration
You may work in groups of up to four students with everyone in the group taking the same number of units (unless prior approval from an instructor is given). You can still choose to work individually if you want to.
When working in groups, please clearly detail the contributions of the individual group members.
Proposal
Due: Jan. 23, 2026 at 5pm pacific time
The purpose of the proposal is to have you think about the types of problems we hope to solve in this class. Describe at a high level the problem you would like to solve for your final project and how it relates to the topics covered in this class. Note that you are free to change your project between the proposal and the Final Project Status Update.
- Deliverable: write-up, 2 pages max (not including figures and references), PDF format
- Weighting: 5% of the overall grade
- Submission: on Gradescope; please have only one group member submit the proposal and select the other group members during submission
You may find this optional LaTeX template useful. You are free to use your own template (you do not need to use LaTeX).
Status Update
Due: Feb. 20, 2026 at 5pm pacific time
You will provide a 1 page status update on your current progress. Please re-introduce the problem, outline what you have been able to accomplish, and provide a timeline to completion.
- Deliverable: write-up, 1 page max (not including figures and/or references), PDF format
- Weighting: 5% of the overall grade
- Submission: on Gradescope; please have only one group member submit the proposal and select the other group members during submission
Lightning Talk
Due: Mar. 13, 2026 at 5pm
You will create a two-minute recorded lightning talk on your final project. Your talk should outline the problem you are trying to solve and the techniques you are using. The ability to present your ideas concisely in a short amount of time is an extremely valuable skill in both academia and industry. The goal of this lightning talk is to give you a chance to practice. We will be evaluating based on your ability to concisely present your ideas. Do not go over the two-minute time limit!
- Deliverable: two-minute recorded presentation
- Weighting: 5% of the overall grade
- Submission: on Gradescope; videos should be in mp4 format; please have only one group member submit the proposal and select the other group members during submission
Final Report
Due: Mar. 13, 2026 at 5pm
Write a 4-6 page (not including references) paper describing your research. It should follow the typical conference style with an abstract, introduction, etc. State the problem you are trying to solve, introduce your approach, and review the relevant literature. The experiments should be described in sufficient detail so that someone with a reasonable background in the area could reproduce your results. Show your results and discuss the conclusions that can be drawn. You can use the AAAI, AIAA, NIPS, or IEEE paper templates (the LaTeX version looks better, but Word will be accepted)—or you can use the template of another conference of your choice.
If you end up using LaTeX, we recommend using the biblatex package to manage references, pgfplots for plotting data, and tikz for drawing figures—but you are free to use whatever you want.
If you are in a group, please include a section after the conclusions that explains how each group member contributed to the project.
- Deliverable: write-up, 4-6 pages, PDF format
- Weighting: 15% of the overall grade
- Submission: on Gradescope; please have only one group member submit the proposal and select the other group members during submission
Grading
The final grade will based on the following criteria:
| Final Project Rubric | |
| Submitted | 2 points |
| Problem Clearly Stated Succinct and clear problem description appropriate for other members of the course. | 2 point |
| Approach Clearly Stated Succinct and clear approach description appropriate for other members of the course. | 2 point |
| Appropriateness of Approach It is justified why the specific approach in question was chosen for the problem at hand. | 2 point |
| Analysis and Results The approach described was quantitatively analyzed according to a set of clearly described metrics, and the results of this analysis presented as figures/tables/graphs/etc. | 1 point |
| Clarity of Drawings, Graphs, Tables The drawings, graphs and tables included support the points that are made in the paper/presentation. Complex concepts that require diagrammatic or visual presentation are appropriately presented. | 1 point |
| Quality of Discussion and Conclusion The conclusions follow logically from the presented results. Salient aspects of the experiments that were introduced earlier are included in the discussion. | 1 point |
| Adequacy of References and Discussion of Prior Work If the project is a follow-on from an ongoing larger research project, previous or closely related publications are summarized and cited in order to provide adequate background. If the project is new but closely related to existing research in literature, the relevant sources are cited and discussed. Finally, citations are provided for any algorithms and software not developed in the scope of the project. | 1 point |
| Structure of Paper The paper/presentation is divided into sections that make it easy to read and follow. | 1 point |
| Writing Quality Terms are properly defined and there is no unnecessary jargon. Sentences come to logical conclusions. The writing structure does not interfere with comprehension. | 1 point |
| Abstract or Overview There is a reasonable abstract, overview or table of contents present in the paper. | 1 point |
| Total | 15 points |
The final report is worth 15% of your grade.
Students who are registered for 4 units are expected to spend 30 additional hours on the project component and will be graded according to this expectation. We encourage that the paper that is produced should be ready for submission to a peer-reviewed conference but this is not required.
Peer Review
Due: Mar. 20, 2026 at 5pm
Peer review is an important part of science and engineering. Understanding the review process will make you a better writer. As part of this class, you will be randomly assigned two student papers to peer review in the spirit of a real conference or journal article review. The task of the referee is outlined in this article by Alan Jay Smith. Although you will not be making recommendations for or against publication, you will need to answer the questions listed in Section 4 of Smith’s article. Throughout your review, we encourage you to be kind and constructive.
Each person will be assigned 2 reviews. Each of your reviews should be 1 page. You will be graded according to the quality and constructiveness of your review. Your reviews will be provided anonymously to the authors, so please do not include your name in your review.
- Deliverable: two write-ups, 1 page EACH, PDF format
- Weighting: 5% of the overall grade
- Submission: on Gradescope