Quiz 1 Grading Comments

Graded Team ID Question 1 Score
1 30
1 30
1 30
1 25
1 27
1 15
1 30
1 10
2 30
2 30
2 30
2 30
2 30
2 30
2 30
2 30
4 27
4 30
4 15
4 30
4 30
4 30
4 18
4 0
4 30
5 25
5 15
5 20
5 5
5 15
5 5
5 15
5 15
5 15
6 30
6 30
6 30
6 25
6 23
6 30
6 25
6 30
6 30
6 20
7 30
7 30
7 30
7 30
7 30
7 20
7 25
7 27
7 30
8 27
8 30
8 20
8 20
8 30
8 20
8 23
8 15
8 10
9 27
9 30
9 30
9 30
9 23
9 30
9 30
9 30
10 20
10 30
10 25
10 25
10 30
10 20
11 25
11 25
11 30
11 20
11 30
11 20
11 20
11 25
11 20
11 28
11 20
12 15
12 15
12 15
12 15
12 15
12 15
12 15
12 15
12 15
12 15
13 30
13 20
13 30
13 20
13 20
13 30
13 20
13 20
13 19
14 30
14 25
14 30
14 30
14 30
14 29
14 30
14 30
15 15
15 15
15 15
15 15
15 15
15 15
15 15
15 20
15 15
16 25
16 20
16 20
16 25
16 30
16 20
16 20
16 30
16 30
16 30
16 30
17 30
17 25
17 30
17 25
17 20
17 25
17 30
17 25
17 30
18 20
18 25
18 30
18 30
18 25
18 30
18 20
18 20
19 25
19 20
19 30
19 20
19 18
19 25
19 20
19 20
19 20
20 0
20 15
20 10
20 15
20 5
20 13
20 0
20 20
20 5
21 5
21 5
21 10
21 15
21 12
21 15
21 10
22 15
22 0
22 0
22 0
22 10
22 0
22 0
22 0
22 5
23 25
23 22
23 21
23 20
23 15
23 25
23 20
23 30
24 30
24 30
24 30
24 30
24 30
24 30
24 30
24 30
24 30
25 5
25 22
25 27
25 25
25 30
25 25
25 30
25 20
25 28
26 25
26 15
26 15
26 20
26 15
26 25
26 29
26 15
27 30
27 30
27 20
27 20
27 15
27 25
27 25
27 25
28 20
28 30
28 25
28 28
28 20
28 20
28 30
29 25
29 30
29 20
29 25
29 30
29 30
29 20
29 30
29 25
30 30
30 30
30 30
30 20
30 20
30 30
30 22
30 25
31 29
31 30
31 25
31 30
31 20
31 30
31 25
32 30
32 30
32 20
32 20
32 30
32 20
32 28
32 20
32 30
33 5
33 10
33 15
33 0
33 10
33 15
33 0
33 5
34 30
34 25
34 14
34 30
34 25
34 25
34 25
34 20
34 30
35 15
35 0
35 0
35 15
35 15
35 0
35 10
35 0
36 15
36 15
36 15
36 5
36 15
36 15
36 15
36 18
36 15
37 12
37 5
37 25
37 12
37 28
37 15
37 15
37 30
38 0
38 5
38 0
38 10
38 0
38 5
38 5
38 15
38 0
39 20
39 20
39 20
39 24
39 20
39 15
39 20
39 20
40 28
40 20
40 25
40 0
40 20
40 20
40 30
41 5
41 22
41 20
41 0
41 15
41 15
41 10
42 10+10
42 5
42 15
42 20
42 15
42 5
42 10
42 10
43 10
43 17
43 30
43 30
43 20
43 20
43 20
43 25
44 15
44 15
44 15
44 15
44 30
44 25
44 20
44 15
44 15
44 15
45 15
45 15
45 20
45 15
45 15
45 15
45 15
45 30
45 15
46 29
46 30
46 30
46 30
46 20
46 30
46 30
46 30
46 30
47 25
47 20
47 20
47 20
47 25
47 30
47 26
47 20
48 30
48 30
48 30
48 30
48 30
48 30
48 30
48 30
48 30
49 15
49 30
49 30
49 15
49 10
49 20
49 17
49 15
49 25
50 26
50 30
50 30
50 30
50 25
50 25
50 30
50 30
50 10
51 30
51 30
51 25
51 25
51 30
51 30
51 30
51 30
51 20
52 30
52 30
52 15
52 23
52 30
52 20
52 30
52 18
53 20
53 30
53 20
53 30
53 20
53 30
53 20
53 30
53 25
54 20
54 25
54 20
54 30
54 20
54 19
54 20
54 25
54 20
55 30
55 25
55 27
55 30
55 30
55 20
55 25
55 30
56 15
56 15
56 15
56 15
56 15
56 20
56 15
56 20
56 5
57 15
57 0
57 30
57 10
57 30
57 10
57 10
57 15
57 15
58 15
58 15
58 10
58 10
58 5
58 15
58 5
58 0
59 15
59 20
59 15
59 15
59 10
59 17pt
59 0
59 30
59 5
60 30
60 15
60 30
60 10
60 25
60 30
60 25
60 30
61 25
61 30
61 25
61 15
61 25
61 30
61 30
61 30
61 30
62 30
62 30
62 30
62 30
62 30
62 30
62 30
62 30
63 30
63 30
63 30
63 30
63 30
63 30
63 30
63 30
They replied to the each distracter and explained why they are not the correct answer with equation. And the explanations a
All answers are correct
Correct
The question 1.a is well justify, but they don't speek about the p-value in the 1.b. However, the justification is good because
answer of 1-b is a little different than correct answer
No mention of p-value in 1- (b)
Correct
1-b did not mentioned about p-value, but mentioned example enough to answer.
Great!
Correct
This team answered correctly
full solution is given

(a): 15, (b): 15
Good
gj
answer of (b) does not contain p-value
Perfect
Just (a) is correct.
It matches the correct answer.
Correct
Good
a.)-5 for not enough explanation. What grades are high enough? b.)-5 for not mention p value. -2 for not mention wrong bou
(a) You made same mistake as I did, which is misreading the problem.
(b) There is no answer to the question in your answer.
Good explanation
Ignoring nonlinear term leads to biased fitting.
Since the correct answer for 1.(b) is No I couldn't give any point for 1.(b)
Explanation of the part (b) is not correct according to solutions, even though I totally agree and wrote the same answer.
part b)
The answer is incorrect, hence an explanation as well. Therefore, points received is 0
1(b) is wrong(-15)
In the a) part explanation is wrong, although the answer is correct. The b) part is incorrect.
For (a), I thought deleting "temrs" is not good answer, but I gave full points anyway. For (b), the answer is NO. I guess you c
1.(b)
only part a is correct
Prob. 2 is for p-values, but reasonable answer
perfect
9ood answer
I deducted the 5 points from 1(b), cuz the explanation is too general.
explanation of 1-(b) is ambiguous.
-
Great explanation with equations but it seems like they made a mistake when writing equation
well justified answer
Correct answers
You wrote so much answers but the answer of b differ in solution.
None
All answers correct with adequate explanation
I don't quite understand the answer of part (b) but the key answer is no so... sorry.
.
They have adequately described their solution as a guideline of the solution.
mention about significant test(ex: p-value) is missing
b) feature weight acts like feature normalisation. There is no use of general feature normalisation in this case.
p-value ?
all of answer and explanations are correct
p value ?
.
Read the reference solution carefully.
b) Weak explanation: they did not mention p-value.
Short answers, but correct
You need to write more detail and you do not right answer in solution
(a) 10 points since the explanation without an expression: Y = 50 + 20X1 + 0.07X2 + 35X3 + 0.01(X1 X2) 10(X1 X3).
(b) 13 points since the explanation without generalization regarding p-value test.
Both of their explanation about their answer are not sufficient. So I gave them 1(a) 5+5 points and 1(b) 5+0 points.

Good
Answers are correct. I think explanations are enough although there's no word 'p-value'.
good
All correct with correct explanation.
Explanation of 1-(b) is ambiguous.
They answered correctly and well explained about their answers.
good
Good explanation.
You get part a correctly (15). You haven't explain the reason why we cant ignore so i gave I only 5 marks. In total 20

More detailed explanation is needed
need more specific explanation on (b)
N/A
I gave them 10pt for 1(a) cause they got the answer correct but explanation is kinda out of the point. Also gave them half of
a) perfect 15, b) correct answer, but no explanation about p-value (-5) 10
A : Prefect.
B : The answer is right. And there's no statement on p-value. But the explanation goes well, so part-scoring for the explanat
For Question 1, part (b): even though there was no mention of the p-value of the regression coefficient, the grader deemed
Answer for 1-a) provided proper explanation. But for 1-b, the explanation did not mention about p-value
I seem to have answered well.
They
(a)didn't
say
"p-value examination"
.
(b) p-value .
They gave perfect explain for (a) but in (b), to say "It enable to predict correct value of salary", they have to mention the p-v
-10: 1(b) Not mentioning p-value
Corrected, but there is no explanation about p-value(statistical explanation)
mention about significant test(ex: p-value) is missing
a) correct, b) no answer provided
1.(b) is not answered
(a) . (b) .
Option (a) was well answered however option (b) was not filled. You can read the provided solution.
Did not answer 1.b
(a) looks good to me, (b) empty answer :(
No answer for 1-b
Nothing explained on (b)
a) is answer but they do not answer about b)
question 1-a ok but team12 does not solve question 1-b
perfect
use p-value for 1-(b)
it's perfect
(a) 5 for the correct answer, 10 for the explanation.
(b) 5 for the correct answer, 0 for the explanation
Agree
(b) wrong explanation
a) (-1), b)T or F (-3), p-value (-7)
Everything is correct.
correct answer, but sloppy explanation (does not mentions p-value) thus -5
You gave nice answer. But I think we should write answer of (a) detail more.
Good job!
all good
a) (-1)
perfect
The answer of (a) and the explanation is correct. (15 points).
The answer of (b) and the explanation is correct. (15 points).
1 b) is wrong answer .We have to the p-value of the regression coefficient to determine whether the interaction term is statis
To know the relationship between the interaction term and the salary, we should examine the p-value of the regression coffi
(b) How did you compare the factor which is related to X4 with other factors?
1-(b) got wrong
(b) p-value .
1.(a) Correct answer with right explanation. (15 points)
(b) Wrong answer with wrong explanation. (0 points)
1-b
the answer is not correct
Wrong answer for b).
1b is wrong. The correct answer is "cannot ignore"
(a) correct answer (5), proper equation 10(3.5-GPA) describing statement (D) is used for explaining (10)
(b) correct answer (5), Although not mentioning p-value whether interaction term is statistically significant or not, possibility
The answer of (b) is correct (5 points). However, the description of the p-value was not specified.
a) (-3), b) p-value (-7)
p value reasonable .
Even though they don't use the term 'p-value', they explained equivalent statement.
(a) is correct, but the reason for the answer in (b) is incorrect.
We must examine the p-value of the regression coefficient to determine if the
interaction term is statistically significant or not.
nothing
no comments
All answers correct with correct explanation.
NA
The explanation of 1(b) was weak.
For (b), I feel that the explanation is not enough. eg) "IQ, GPA values can be so high" - I would rather say IQ*GPA values ar
(b) There is no mentioned about p-value (-10tps)
correct answer for (b), missing p-value (b)
thus -5
they answers well about a) and b)
Not enough explanation about 1(b)
Answers are correct. I think explanations are enough although there's no word 'p-value'.
(b) explanation is wrong
1-b was insufficient
Okay
Good
A : Prefect.
B : The answer is right. And there's no statement on p-value. But the explanation goes well, so part-scoring for the explanat
-
(a) Correct answer and explanation (+15)
(b) Correct answer about cannot ignore the term but not the reason (+5)
a.)-5 what is high GPA? (in this case more than 3.5) b.) -5 not mention p value
In (b), I think the answer is correct but -5 is because there is no mention of p-value.
You have answered part a correctly (15). For part b you haven't explained correctly so you get only 5 marks
b) w4
Answer is write, but error in derivation. Should add p-value explanation.
all correct but (b) explanation is not sufficient
2.(b): 5
According to the grading criteria, p-value test should be mentioned to get the full credit.
(a) 15, (b) 5. There is no mention of p-value, but it says reasonable reason.
In the 1.(b), you should check the the p-value of the regression coefficient to determine if the interaction term can be ignore
(a) - wrong answer. (b) - justification is not correct.
nice try
1(a) 0(answer is D) + 5(your explanation is correct before 'Therefore ~', but I give half points since your team does not men
(b) 5(answer is correct)
1a answer is incorrect and 1b answer has vague explanation
Answer for (a) is wrong. Answer for (b) is not enough, I would say for example, the order of magnitude for X4 is larger when
They got wrong answer on 1-(a).
The correct answer is D. To know the relationship between the interaction term and the salary, we should examine the p-val
1) wrong answer, but explanation is quite right
Wrong
(a) answer and explanation
CS/Non-CS for (a),
and wrong explanation
10X1-35 for (b)
.
(b) scale p-value .
Wrong answer on a), not mentioning any statistical test
(a)0 incorrect answer (b)10 correct answer but not sufficient explanation
The answer of the problem 1-a) was incorrect, and there is no mention of the p-value of the test in the problem 1-b).
They gave wrong answer for a), and their explanation for b) should be more reasonable.
problem a : wrong.
problem b : correct
For the part (a) it's the other way around.
a) is wrong: 0, b) is correct: 15
(a) Wrong answer and explanation (suppose to be D but wrote B)
(b) Wrong answer and explanation (wrote small coefficient can be ignored)
Please read the solution carefully
(a) 0, (b) 0.
1.(a) score 10,
The given answer and explanation is wrong & not suitable.
In the 1.(a), Let see the model, once the GPS is hihg enough, CS major people earn more on average.
Unfortunately your mathematical approach is not correct and you did not display any conceptual understanding
The answer is inappropriate.
(a) 15 (perfect), (b) 10 (No mention about p-value)
p-value explanation should be added.
Part1: 15. Part2: 6. For the second part of question 1, the explanation is not accurate.
(b) 5 points for correct answer.
You're proving that the term is big, but it is small by the statement of the problem ["Since the coefficient for the GPA/IQ inter
a) correct: 15, b) wrong
b) 5 points deducted due to subjective opinion (that 5% is a significant difference)
Full point (15) for 1a and 5 point for 1b because p-value is not mentioned in the answer.
.
Answers were given correctly, and explanation was sufficient.
good
All correct
Described almost similar with suggested answer

They got both right. They even said when in B we can remove some variables (p-values... I think they might be right). A is w
correct
perfect
You got full mark. Good job!
None
a) The answer is correct (a: +5) and also has good descriptions (a: +10).
b) The answer is correct (b: +5) but they used wrong approach. However, they tried to solve the answer with an example. S
In Question 1-b, it would be better to clearly state that we should check the statistical significance of the term such as p-valu
.
9ood answer
15 points for 1(a). 10 points for 1(b)
The explanation in 1(b) is not perfect but I think it's reasonable explanation.

not mentionning p-value
I assgined -2 points for . What your team answer mean is almost same as solution but, there are no exact mention of 'p-valu
10% heuristic .
(a): 15, (b): 0
(a) is correct answer and well explain about answer. but (b) is wrong answer then wrong explain.
Wrong answer on Question 1(b), but they had a reasonable explanation on their answer
Answer of (b) is wrong and the team doesn't understand p-value of the regression.
a)Perfect 15, b) correct answer, but no explanation about p-value (-5) 10
Good reasoning for the answers provided, but it seems hard to accept the fact that 10% of the most contributing factor coul
(a) Perfect! (b) Incorrect Answer.
Correct
.
2.(b) 5
for (b), they didn't mention about p-value.
(b) wrong explanation
Sub question (b) is not correct
Right ans, but you used wrong term for (b). Also, you should also take coefficient into account - which gives 10^-4 order. Th
1-b is a little different than correct answer
They don't talk about the p-value in the question b, but they know that it comes from the scales of the variables.
-10 : 1(b). not mentioning p-value
Their reasons are right
1.b justification is not that accurate
There is slight difference between the answer of quiz but it is almost right.
Correct answer and explanation for 1-a, correct answer for 1-b but not mentioned about p-value
Answer for B should mention p-value to determine significance.
Good explanation.
in 1B, you need to use p-value test to decide
They got both answers right. For B, they also used an example to prove the answer. Good job here
Explanation for B must mention p-values to determine the significance.
Good Explanation at all, but solution wants to advert on p-vaule. Your group's explanation is actually not 'accurate' in theore
All solved correctly
In part b) what do you mean by "In Relative perspective, Relative Salary values can be ignored"?
(a) is exactly correct and the answer of (b) is correct but the reason is no comment of p-value or regression
correct
(b) "p-value" is not included in your answer
none
no comments
All answer and explanations are enough to get maximum points.
no reference of p-value
Perfect
a) The answer is correct (a: +5) and also has good descriptions (a: +10).
b) The answer is correct (b: +5) but they used wrong approach. However, they tried to solve the answer with an example. S
The explanation for the question b is not very good because they didn't talk about the p-value and just gave 1 example
no explicit mention about 'p value' at 1-(b)
Good explanation, with the calculation proof.
For (a), their answer and the explanation for that answer are correct, so I gave full points (15 points). For (b), their answer is
good
you answered well in option (a). However, I think you misunderstood the option (b). Problem is asking about weight w4(=0.0
9ood answer
I think the answer for (b) is correct, but there is no mention of p-value.
In (a), they made good assumptions about GPA values and proved that D was the right answer in any case.
In (b), they did explain all of things.
B explanation wrong
All good
Correct answer and explanation for 1-a, correct answer for 1-b but not mentioned about p-value
(b) 13 points since answer is correct (5 points) but explanation (8 points) lacks a concept of p-value text.
The explanation is not enough on Question 1(b)

full solution
(a)
A) 0: The answer
: . is D. (b) : The
answer is not stated
CS clearly,
Non CSbut the explanation
. is good.(+5)
B) 10 : .
Wrong answer and explanation for (a)
a) wrong answer, b) must examine the p-value of the regression coefficient to determine if the interaction term is statistically
no answer for a part b, but explanation is O.K. For a part the answer and hence the explanation is wrong.
Wrong answer for (a), but correct answer for (b).
They had a wrong answer at a) and did not offer the proper answer at b).
5 because they got A wrong, and in B they didn't conclude because they went too far with the analysis. They have the idea (
Good reasoning and logical conclusions.
p-value test needed
For the second problem,
we must do p-value test in terms of statistical test rather than doing simple assumption
Good
1.a lacks explanation ( yours is not very clear)
There is a slight lack of explanation for 1- (b)
Although the answer didn't describe p-value, the team has the intuition that range and unit of independent variables can affe
1-(b) p-value .
It is very hard to read though but the answer is correct
They gave wrong answer ( 1-(a))
a)
A) Unfortunately,
0: , CS-student has Major value 0, not 1. b) Wrong answer, because we cannot conclude that some value is si
B) 0: ,
Wrong answer on 1(b)
The answer for (a) was really good. However, we cannot ignore the term w4*X4. And I think the order of w2*X2 and w4*X4 a
. .
a) gave a wrong answer, but the explanation was correct except for the group having switched the values for CS vs. non-CS
Sorry, wrong
(b) is different from solution.
a) picking good answer with good reasoning
b) answer was wrong
-15: 1(b) wrong
1.a. This team wrote a right answer but the explanations are not correct. (They wrote wrong formula on CS / Non-CS major
1.b. This team wrote even a wrong answer, thus the explanations are wrong as well. This team got zero score on this proble
wrong answer for 1(b)
The answer of (b) is incorrect. And the explanation is wrong.
(a) is fine, but (b) was totally wrong.
For (a), their answer and the approach are correct (15 points). For (b), their answer is incorrect (0 points). In their explanatio
1-b got wrong
Unclear
no statistical test mentioned
(a) 15, (b) 10. There is no mention of p-value, but it says a lot of reasonable reasons.
For (a), they specified the GPA as 2 or 2.5 and answered as B, but in this problem GPA value is not given specifically so I gi
A : Wrong answer(B) accompanied(-2 points), Explanation for D is correct. (Explanation for B was ignored in grading)
B : Correct. ('how the model well captures the variability of the data' states p-value)
a) D is the only answer of this question.
b) There is no mention of p-value(I just follow TA's instruction).
A) 10: 2
B) 5: p-value
-
The answer for both 1a and 1b are wrong and the explanation is not suitable.
You successfully created a mathematical expression using the given information which accounts for your 5 points. Unfortun
Wrong answer
1a> 0/5 (wrong ans.) + 5/10 (no term of x1*x2, x1*x3) 1b> 0/5 (wrong ans.) + 5/10 (slightly weak opinion)
(a) Wrong answer and explanation (suppose to be D but wrote C)
(b) Wrong answer and explanation (wrote small coefficient can be ignored)
Wrong answer and explanation for (a), and lack of explanation for (b)
only (b) answer is correct
Can't ignore
(a) is wrong, and (b) is not enough explanation.
1-(a), (b)'s answer are all correct but no explanation of 1-(b)
No justification of answer 1-b.
(b) 5 points for the correct answer, 0 points for the explanation
.
Did not explain for 1.b
(a) is well explained but (b) has't explained
(b) correct answer(5) without explanation(0)
p-value of the regression coefficient to determine if the interaction term is statistically significant or not should be examined
answer (a) and (b) is correct but answer (b) is not explained enough(not at all).
1-(a) is perfectly correct but in 1-(b) there is slight difference between official answer. But I see they got general point.
1.(b) it's not depend on the scale, but p-value
OK
Wrong answer, Wrong explanation
1.(b):5
p-value explanation is not there
Good. But for (b), Explanation is different from the solution So I'm not sure I can give score; I really think this answer is also
w4
5 points for a : I think you read the description incorrectly; X3 is one for non-CS and zero for CS students. 0 points for b : I c
(b) The explanation is in detail, but the answer is a bit unclear on the effectiveness of the term. (2 points, 10 points)
The magnitude of the terms does not state the p-value explicitly. The explanation is not very reasonable.
(a) wrong (b) don't understand
(a) 5 (wrong answer), (b) 10 (no mention p-value)
wrong answer for (a)
a) Correct explanation, wrong answer. b) no answer, explanation is incorrect
Problem (a): the explanation is correct(+10) but the multiple choice answer was wrong(probably a mistake). Problem (b): T
a): wrong. b) even though y is enough small, x2 or x4 cannot be ignored.
a , Major term .
.
CS-student's Major value is 0, not 1.
wrong answers, wrong explanations
(a) 0 points for the correct answer, 5 points for the explanation
1(a) wrong,
(a) 1(b)
correct,
but
not enough explanation
,
(b)
For part a) team 43 is comparing choices rather than Earning of CS and Non CS student. So I gave 5 points for correct ans
perfect
correct
i think you missed the fact that there are w0, w1 and w2
(a): Looks good to me. (b): The explanation is not quite related with the p-value concept
b. Explanation is not enough
b) the explanation is very confusing, I do not understand what author meant
Cannot ignore the interaction between GPA and IQ. We need to examine p-value for its significance before ignoring it.
b was wrong
(b) wrong
(a) is explained well. but (b) is wrong because they are saying "yes".
good
Ignoring nonlinear term leads to biased fitting.
in 1B, the answer is no, and you need p-value test
1-(b): wrong answer
(a) , (b) p-value .
The answer of (a) is correct but the answer of (b) is exactly incorrect
Wrong answer for (b). (a) is correct.
1(b) is wrong, both explanation and answer.
In (b), due to the lack of the explanation of examining p-value and wrong answer, it lost 10 points.
(b) wrong answer, not mentioned about p-value examination

b) wrong answer and explanation
In (b), they didn't answer correct things about ignoring that term in predicting the starting salary.
1-(b) is the wrong answer
In 2(b), you did mention about (null) hypothesis. But it looks like the TAs are looking for the word 'p-value' explicitly.
1(a) The answer and CS and non-CS' predicted starting salaries respectively were correct, but the process of calculation wa
(b) The answer was correct, but your explanation(In our ~ two decimal digits) seems unnecessary.
NA
nothing
+ There is no mention of p-value.(TA)
Correct
Correct
explanation of (b) is weak but acceptable
The description of 1(b) is not enough.
They don't consider p-value in 1-(b) problem.
-10 point to for (b) explanation. Please refer to https://kaist.elice.io/courses/60/boards/222/5796
For question 1-b : Answer is correct, but explanation is insufficient
(b) Almost right. But key terms such as "p-values", "normalization" were omitted. (-5)
.
For 1-(a), It would be much better to clearly state the reason of "CS majors have higher salary provided that their GPA is hig
There is no explanation about p-value
they answer the question a)and b) . their answer is correct and explain well.
answer and explanations are all correct.
answer (a) and (b) is correct and fully explained.
a)Perfect 15, b) Perfect 15
perfect.
-
.
The team understands linear regression and p-value regression.
Correct
The answer to (a) is very well explained
I think the answers are perfect and correct.
They answered correctly and explained perfectly.
B
a) '20*X1' term should also be considered, so that for non-CS students Y=35+10*X1+... and for CS students, Y=20*X1+... .
b) Wrong answer but 5 points for the explanation
1(b) not correct, but good explanation (+5)
a) The answer is correct (a: +5) and also has a good description (a: +10).
b) The answer is wrong (b: +0), but they tried to solve the answer with an example. So I'll give 2 points (b: +2).
For b), they gave the wrong answer, and the explanation was not reasonable.
(b) solution reasonable .
1-b
lack of describing
Correct
I agree the answers
it's perfect.
1 b) No explicit mention of 'p-value'
correct answer for (b), does not mention about p-value (b)
thus, -5
Nice comment about why we cannot ignore the interaction term: "[because] terms are not normalized"
Correct answers with explanation
in (a) the explanation is wrong. in (b) different approach is good. but there is no p-value explanation
dd
Good
must examine the p-value
Although the answer(b) didn't describe p-value, the team has the intuition that range and unit of independent variables can
Did well. Nothing to comment.
correct
Simply good
Correct
1.a. The answer and explanation are good. (+15)
1.b. The answer is correct, but the explanation doesn't seem quite enough. (+5)
Well answered. Incidentally, you can think more about why we can not ignore the coefficient even if it is small relatively. (No
Good
a) 35-10*GPA . -5. b) p-value regression coefficient explanation -10.
(a) 15, (b) 8. There is no mention of p-value, but it says reasonable reason.
There is no explanation about p-value

(a): 15, (b): 15
explanation needs to be more clear
-10 point to for (b) explanation. Please refer to https://kaist.elice.io/courses/60/boards/222/5796
correct
The reason of b was wrong
Correct.
They answer the question a) correctly. But the problem b) is not correct partially. They argue that w4* X4 is ranging from 0 ~
and should not be ignored but we must examine the p-value of the regression coefficient to determine if the interaction term
Perfect
good
"p-value" is not included in your answer
explanation about p-value is missing
At (b), in terms of p-value, there was lack of explanation. so 5 points deduction.but different approch was good.
b , w4X4 , coefficient
Perfect
Received 5 points for b), as the explanation simply restated the given answer, but contained non reference to the p-value or
Part1: 5+8(The explanation is not accurate.)
Part2: 5+1(The explanation is wrong.)
We must examine the p-value of the regression coefficient to determine if the
interaction term is statistically significant or not.
Not mention the examination of the regression coefficient p-value.
(a) you just input numbers into data for prove 'D' is right. (10)
(b) "p-value" is not included in your answer. (10)
Correct
Not mention the examination of the regression coefficient p-value.
p-value ?
Good
Team 55's answers about question (a) and (b) is correct, and explain well.
(2) not because of "variation of sampled data is large"
Although the answer didn't describe p-value, the team has the intuition that range and unit of independent variables can affe
NA
The answer of (a) is correct but the answer of (b) is exactly incorrect
(a) is answered enough but anwer(b) is totally wrong
Wrong answer for b) and no keyword in explanation: p-value and regression coefficient.
(a) Good! (b) Incorrect answer.
b was wrong
use p-value for (b)
1b) wrong answer.
no statistical test mentioned
1-(b) Incorrect answer
1.a. This team wrote correct explanations but got wrong answer (This team chose B as the answer as well) (-5)
1.b. This team wrote correct answer but its explanations are not enough (-10)
a) answer is not b and d, and no explanation: 0, b) wrong: 0
1.(a) solution was so detailed and well explained
1-(a): no explanation for answer D
1-(b): dosn't consider p-value
(a) little bit lack of equation stated in solution, but the explanation is good enough.
5 points for a) = not correct single answer. 5 points for b) not exact explanation.
Partial point for (b)
(b) is a wrong. Even when IQ is high, the term is still small. However, it is
They gave the wrong answer (a)
For (a), their answer "C" is wrong (0 points). However, their approach is correct. I think they were confused and had a mista
the answer to problem A is D not C
Partial point for (b)
Right equation but wrong interpret, Do not use p-value for (b)
1-(b) answer No .
Sorry, the correct answer is D for the part (a)
answer for part a is incorrect, answer for part b is correct. However, the explanation for part b is incorrect.
Honestly, the answer is far from the given response. Sorry to grade this problem.
a)-5 for wrong answer, correct explanation in A, -5 for wrong choice. b) -5 not mention p value
Valid assumptions and proper conclusions for 1-a and 1-b. However, for 1-c and 1-d, there is no assumption 'base salaries
(a) is wrong
Answer of (a) is wrong and the team seems to not understand linear regression formula.
1-a wrong answer, 1-b did not mentioned about p-value, but mentioned example enough to answer.
- answer(5pt): 5pt
- explanation(10pt): 5pt, It should mention p-value
Both (a) and (b) are not correct
good answer
only (b)'s answer is correct
(a)+5 (b)+10
In (b), they did explain all of things.
Incorrect answer B is included in 1-a. No p-value comments on 1-b
They have good answers. However for questions b, to get the maximum points, they should mention p-value
(a) . . (b) p-value
.
Good answers
a . b regression coefficient 5 .
good explanation
(b) Reason was correct but, key terms such as "Normalization" or "P-value" were omitted. (Not a general explanation) (-5)
To know the relationship between the interaction term and the salary, we should examine the p-value of the regression coffi
(a) correct answer(5), proper equation 35-10a describing statement (D) is used for explaining (10)
(b) correct answer(5), Although not mentioning p-value whether interaction term is statistically significant or not, the reason
Correct
Good
Did well
Clear explanation
All correct
gj
Your explanation with p-value is good enough.
perfect
Nothing
perfect
(a) .(b) p-value .
Their answer contains all the key points and detailed explanations.
The explanation was perfect.
Both the answer and its explanation are correct for each sub question.
good
Answers are correct with good explanations.
it's perfect
(a) 15 (pefect), (b) 15 (perfect)
Perfect
Question 2 Score
15
20
17
15
15
20
20
20
18
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
15
20
19
20
15
15
20
12
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
15
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
17
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
10
20
10
20
20
20
15
20
15
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
19
20
20
20
20
20
20
18
20
10
20
20
30
20
20
20
20
20
16
20
15
20
20
20
16
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
17
30
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
10
0
20
10
19
20
10
10
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
0
20
20
10
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
15
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
15
20
20
10
20
20
20
19
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
11
17
20
20
20
20
20
17
20
20
20
16
19
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
10
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
15
18
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
5
5
5
10
10
15
20
10
20
10
10
20
20
5
20
20
20
20
19
20
20
20
20
20
20
10
0
5
10
20
15
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
15
10
20
10
5
20
10
10
17
20
20
10
15
15
20
0
8
10
17
20
15
15
5
20
20
13
20
20
20
20
17
20
20
15
20
15
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
10
17
10
8
20
0
20
19
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
5
20
20
20
20
10
20
20
20
5
20
8
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
18
20
20
20
20
20
19
20
20
20
14
20
10
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
18
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
10
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
18
20
19
10
12
17
20
20
15
15
0
5
0
20
10
5
18
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
19
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
Didn't calculate the answer in 2 (a), but they calculate the answer in 2(b).
Correct Answers
(a) Expression using the X1, X2 is omitted. (-3) (b) correct
They used the logistic function but they didn't write the expression
X1 and X2 are missing from 2-a, which does not lead to a full answer
Correct
Correct answer
Nice, but little error in the final result value.
Correct
full solution is given

(a): 10, (b): 10
Correct
gj
answer is correct
Perfect
They did not input the x1(40) and x2(3.5) value
a. X1 and X2 value(40,3.5) was not considered
Good
a.)-5 no substitution
(b) should not be inequality.
Good explanation.
The exponential should contain the minus value
I gave 10(full point) for 2.(a) because there were errors in lecture slide
Answer in (a) is incorrect, but the problem was in minus sign, and the definition is fine. Actually, in your case student who wa
used formula is wrong, but due to announcements the lecture formula can be counted
Correct Answers
The team used the wrong formula, but since it was in the lecture slides, the full score is still given.
For (a), you missed minus in front of WX terms. If you didn't, you would get correct answer. But there was instruction not to
not explaned
Perfect
perfect
9ood answer
All the answers and explanations are correct.
Correct answer
-
Clear and great explanation and did calculation
P(yi = 1|xi, w) = sigm(w0 + w1xi) ; not Y
Correct Answers
your answer is detail. I can understand it well.
None
All answers correct and correct equations for the logistics function used
^^
.
definition of sigmoid is wrong.
Could be a bit more descriptive.
all of answer and explanations are correct

2-(a) : 37.75%
.
Good.
All answers correct
Logistic formular is incorrect But it's fine.
(a) 5 points since it uses right sigmoid function but provides wrong answers (the correct answer is around 0.3775).
(b) 10 points since both the answer and explanation are correct.
Even if they got wrong answer, they used this wrong version of equation from errata in the lecture slide so I gave them full p
2-(a)
Good
Answers are correct. All used the definition of the logistic function.
good
All answers correct with correct formulas used
Correct answer
They answered correct results and formulas.
good
Good explanation.
You got full mark. Good work!

Your answer is correct
answer was correct
N/A
All the answers and explanations are correct.
a),b) perfect - 20
Perfect.
Well done!
Correct answer with full explanation
perfect answer
(a)(b) .
Correct answer with the equations and calculations
Good
perfect
perfect
a) sign mistake
2(a) answer is slightly wrong but it's because of errata is the lecture note. I gave the 20 points for the question 2
logistic function .
Obviously well answered.
Correct
nice work!
Nothing
You need ( ) on the answer, so I reduce 2 points
they make good formula and get answer
Question 2-a are okay
perfect
Good
it's perfect
(a) 5 for the correct answer, 5 for the explanation.
(b) 5 for the correct answer, 5 for the explanation
No comments.
Agree
good
Good.
a) (-2)
b) (-2)
Everything is correct.
correct answer, but wrong expression in (a). thus -5
You use right formula and calculated it well!!
It would be nice if you would use equation editor next time. It's really hard to read.
all good
a) . (-2)
b) . (-2)
simple question
It is correct solution!
they understand logistic regression correctly and apply the sigmoid function well.
The team 15 answer is equal to the answer sheet
P(y|x, w) -> P(y=1|x, w), sigm(z) = 1 / (1 + exp(-z))
great
.
Correct answer with appropriate model used.
there is the definition of logistic function and good answer
Sadly reduced the score for 2-1 due to the last statement: probability is approx. "0.38%"
Simply good
(a) correct answer by using sigmoid function (10)
(b) correct answer by using sigmoid function (10)
good
Simple question.
Answered correctly.
-
nothing
no comments
All answers correct with correct formulas used.
NA
So simple question.
.
Good answer
correct answer for (b), good expression for (b)
not points deducted
they make good formula and drives good answer
correct
Answers are correct with the the definition of logistic function.
(a,b): Written definition only, with no value inserted.
Not only is it not a full answer, but no explanation at all
Okay
There are no certain values of answer
A : Wrong answer, but admitted as correct answer by grading policy due to the errata in the lecture slide. And equation only
B : Wrong answer, but admitted as correct answer by grading policy due to the errata in the lecture slide.
-
Since the wrong equation is due to the typo in lecture slide, no deduction on the score is made.
a.)-5 no substitution b.) -5 no substitution ( it is not okay for leaving variables in answers.)
Correct answer
you got full marks. Good job!
- y=0 .
Good.
Great!
(a) answer is wrong but its cause of the errata in the lecture slide
therefore not decrease point
1.(a): 10
2.(b): 10
It is perfect.
You used wrong definition of logistic function. So all answer are wrong.
In the 2.(b), answer is correct, but the process is wrong.
correct
could have laid out answer better
2. (a) 5 (Since your team did not express the definition of the logistic function, I deduct 5 points.)
(b) 5 (same reason like (a))
good
.
They calculated well.
.
Perfect. No subtract points.
(a), (b) .
ok
all correct
correct answers
They understood the logistic regression process.
correct
No comments.
a) good definition but no answer: 5 b) is correct 10
(a) Correct equation and answer
(b) Correct equation and answer
Good
Good Job.
The definition & function expression are included in the answer.

I think your answer is correct.
Good
I seem to have answered weel
(a) 10 (perfect), (b) 10 (perfect)
Great!
Their answer contains all the key points and detailed explanations. Even if the answer used wrong denition of logistic functio
correct
a) correct explanation but wrong answer: 5, b) correct: 10
Wrong definition of the logistic function due to error in the lecture slide.
The definition & function expression are included in the answer.
2 (a) is wrong.
Answers used the right equations to get the correct answer.
good
All correct
Almost great but misuse of equal sign rather than double tilde ()

Good. All the calculations are there.
correct
perfect
You got full marks. Good Job!
None
They used the definition of logistic function (a: +5, b: +5) and used it well for answering the questions (a: +5, b: +5).
Answer 2-a was wrong, and answer 2-b was correct with wrong procedure. In the answer sheet, the right formula of P is tha
.
9ood answer

all good
-
at least 50 50 .
(a): 10, (b): 10
(a), (b) are correct answer, and formulas are correct.
-
The team understands logistic function, but they doesn't present formula for understanding.
a) No how to calculate w^Tx(-1) 9 , b) good 10
Good reasoning and proper calculation.
Perfect!
Correct
.
2.(a) 10
1.(b) 10
good
Perfect!
Done well
the sign is inversed in 2-a
They used the wrong definition of logistic function but I don't decrease the points because of the errata on the lecture slide.
Good
The right formula and calculation
detailed answer by mentioning that you are using the logistic function
They calculated well.
Provided correct formula for linear regression and answer for problems
Good!
Good explanation.
great
All good again. They solve the equations (the right ones), and got the right answers.
Good!
perfect soultion
Calculated correctly
Well done!
exactly correct
correct
No problem
none
no comments
perfect
You didn't write the definition of logistic function. That's why I reduce 5 points of your score.
The answers are correct, but I think it would be appropriate to present the formula expressed in terms of x and w
They used the definition of logistic function (a: +5, b: +5) and used it well for answering the questions (a: +5, b: +5).
Everything is good. They use the logistic function and justify the answer
perfect
They understood the process of logistic regression.
For both (a) and (b), the answers are correct, so I gave full points.
great
obviously well answered,
9ood answer
Correct answer
All in answer, They did correct Logistic function.
(a) Didn't defined logistic function and answer expression (b) Didn't defined logistic function
did not specify logistic function
Wrong formula for a)
They only wrote about classification result, not probability for 2-a(0 points). For 2-b, they suggested both correct answer and
(b) 10 points since the answer and its explanation are both correct.
-
no estimation in part (a)
Perfect!
A) 5:
B) 5:
Logistic function was wrong in answer for (a)
none
everything is correct.
Wrong answer for (a). For (b), the answer is correct but the formula is wrong.
They got this one right. The calculations are there. Good.
Good reasoning, exact calculation, and logical conclusion.
good
Almost great but misuse of equal sign rather than double tilde ()
Good
Correct answer but you should have mentioned that you are using the logistic function
answered correctly
Correct answer.
.
:)
They did not give the final value (a) // They did not give the wrong final value (b)
No values,
A) 0: (even
,if
we don't
have to calculate it, some brief equation required.)
B) 5:
Wrong answer on 2(b)
Correct answer
. .
Answers used the correct equations to reach the correct values.
Correct
nothing
I think that they make good formula and drive answer well
Good
The answers and explanations of this team on this question are correct.
-
all correct
great
Clear
wrong sigmoid func
(a) 10 (b) 5. The expression is not completed. Constants are needed instead of variables w0, w1, w2.
For (b), they did not set the problem correctly. It should be an equation instead of inequality.
A : Wrong answer, but admitted as correct answer by grading policy due to the errata in the lecture slide.
B : The same as above.
+ You should add a minus symbol(-) on the exponent of (e).
Also in (b), x1 needs to the over 50hours (X1 > 50, not X < 50).
A) 5:
B) 0: 50% ,
-
They only give the function expression without the function definition. 5 point for 2a and 5 point for 2b --> 10 point.
Not really your fault since the formula was given without the negative sign in the slides. Nevertheless, unfortunately, the res
2-(a) result of computation is wrong
although the sign of exponent is wrong, it's ok(errata)
(b) Wrong equation but correct answer
Since the wrong equation is due to the typo in lecture slide, no deduction on the score is made.
Wrong number for (b) but there is no explanation for logistic function
only (b) is correct
null
good
no correct answer and explanations
For 2-(a), I cannot understand the answer sheet. What is the meaning of "real value is 1" ? Actually the author should have
(a) 0 points for the correct answer, 5 points for the explanation
.
Correct
(b) is well explained but (a) has't expression of the answer. (a) problem require "students who is 40 hours in a month and ha
You should put 40 into X1 and 3.5 into X2
(b) using sigmoid function(5), equation of answering process is right(5)
There is no enough explanation and only formula in answer(a) is right. I cannot give whole credit.
They calculated with accurate equation well.
correct
Wow! 50 hours make probability 50%!!
.
2.(a): 10
2.(b): 10
Good

10 points for a : Well done. 7 points for b : You should give exact X for achieve p=0.5, not the inequality
The definition of the logistic function is used with the expression.
Good
(b) no explanation
in part (a) only values of x1 and x2 are plugged into the equation but no explanationgiven
Good
All subquestions are correctly answered
nice work.
.
typo on lecture slide
Perfect.
perfect
All correct
(b) .
part a is correct. for part b team didnt estimated for exact 50% chance but less then 50% chance
a) They used a logistic function, but there is no exact answer.
b) They used a logistic function, but wrong answer.
(1) : they donnot calculate sigmoid function [ score : 5]
(2) : sigmoid function is wrong (have to use exp(-(xxxx))) [score : 3]
well laid-out
Wrong sigmoid function used: no negation on w^t x
Correct
It would be much easier to read if you would use equation editor. You are missing parenthesis in few places which actually m
6 - (1.0)*(3.5) / 0.05 != (6 - (1.0)*(3.5) ) / 0.05
Good!
perfect
-
perfect explanation and result
good
good
great
(a),(b) .
exactly correct
Correct answer.
All scoring standards were met.
Correct formula, correct answer.
good
none
All in answer, They did correct Logistic function.
Correct answer
-
good
NA
nothing
+ You should add a minus symbol(-) on the exponent of (e).
Correct
Correct
-
2(a) is wrong, 2(b) is right.
.
-
Correct
(a) Wrong answer (-10) / (b) Wrong definition of sigmoid function (-5)
.
For 1-(a), the answer was wrong, but the author followed pretty good procedure (without giving right sign). For 1-(b), also th
Good answer
They understand logistic regression correctly and apply the sigmoid function well for a) and b). The calculation process is a
answer and explanations are all correct.
Perfect
a)Perfect 10, b) Perfect 10
good.
-
.
The team understands sigmoid and formula. So their answer is right.
Good, but used wrong Sigmoid function
Perfect
I think the answers are perfect and correct.
They answered correctly and explained perfectly.
37.8 38%. 1
Good.
All correct
They used the definition of logistic function (a: +5, b: +5) referenced by the lecture note and used it well for answering the q
The answer is correct. But they wrote the formula as Y = 'logistic function'. In logistic regression Y takes the value 1 or 0, no
good
2-b
same with above
Correct
I agree the answers
it's perfect.
-
correct answer for (a), good expression for (a)
correct answer for (b), good expression for (b)
Well done!
Correct answers with right expressions
all correct
correct definition of logistic function and the expression
You can write the sigmoid function instead of sigm()
-
The question was to calculate an exact value of X1. However, X1 in the answer sheet was the range.
Also did well.
correct
Simply good
Correct
Everything seems fine.
Obviously well answered.
Good
None
It is perfect.
Good answer
(a): 10, (b): 10
great
-
correct
perfect
Correct.
they understand logistic regression correctly and apply the formula to problem.
and their calculation is also correct.
Perfect
good
No problem
perfect
good answer.
good
Perfect
Answers contained the right equations to reach the correct values.
-
No problem
Correct
Good
(a), (b)'s answers are correct and formulas are correct.
great
The answer was correct.
NA
exactly correct
all aswers are correct
Wrong answer for a)
Good!
perfect
Good
-
ok
Correct
I think the explanations and answers of the question 2 are correct.
all correct
Clear.
.
Correct
Correct
correct
Good
All calculated correct
Correct
Good
.
Good work.
Everything is O.K
Needs more explanation,
as well as misuse of equal sign rather than double tilde ()
Wrong formula from slides. No point reduction
Wrong calculation for 2-a. Perhaps you forgot to put negative sign within exp(). This could be accounted for the WRONG EQ
(a) is wrong
The team write sigmoid formula, but formula has little error. And answer of (a) is wrong.
2-(a) result of computation is wrong
Succinct and clear
Perfect!
2-b
correct answer
only (b) is correct
1+expo(h(X))
(a) sigm(W^TX) expo(h(X))
sigm
(b) (a)
In (a), they prove P(X) like that P(X) = 1/exp(w0+ w1X1+ w2X2). But this answer is incorrect.
In (b), Because they had wrong answer in (a), this answer is too wrong.
Nothing
They use a wrong formula
(a) logistic function logistic function . (b) function
wrong logistic function
Well done
.
answer was correct
Correct
(a) correct answer by using sigmoid function (10)
(b) correct answer by using sigmoid function (10)
Correct
Good
38% or 37.8%. 1
did well
Clear explanation
All correct
gj
Correct answer
yes
Nothing
perfect
logistic function , .
Perfect.
Both the answer and its explanation are correct for each sub question.
good
Answers are correct with the the definition of logistic function.
it's perfect
Perfect
Question 3 Score
35
24
18
40
40
15
50
50
50
25
10
0
50
50
50
50
40
30
25
50
34
10
18
50
45
20
21
44
30
25
33
46
26
20
50
50
15
38
40
50
45
38
24
50
50
42
40
50
50
20
45
50
0
38
50
38
25
50
50
40
30
34
30
26
50
22
40
50
50
50
40
22
50
40
42
36
37
18
24
24
20
42
15
30
50
50
18
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
10
45
40
5
34
16
10
10
26
38
28
50
50
50
36
36
50
26
8
26
18
32
26
18
25
25
46
36
27
50
31
30
32
20
26
48
22
20
35
50
50
15
30
40
30
40
13
10
50
8
15
50
5
13
25
22
5
13
12
20
25
15
5
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
50
50
50
46
35
30
38
0
26
5
38
26
10
10
40
20
26
34
46
50
26
30
26
38
34
50
25
22
38
40
50
50
16
15
50
28
45
40
34
50
25
40
25
26
40
24
40
21
50
5
10
26
26
26
38
45
20
15
25
26
30
48
50
38
50
26
15
26
26
26
13
13
50
26
26
42
50
26
26
50
36
15
25
30
25
11
15
10
25
20
12
10
26
25
13
9
12
0
25
50
38
50
48
45
50
50
48
26
32
10
16
15
26
26
50
50
40
26
50
50
35
25
45
26
25
25
21
35
13
25
26
26
10
26
22
26
16
10
10
50
22
49
50
42
38
26
26
26
40
0
10
16
40
5
25
27
0
26
25
30
13
26
25
22
42
50
50
50
38
0
50
40
24
35
50
26
26
10
25
50
30
50
30
50
50
50
50
26
26
32
40
30
50
38
13
25
50
40
34
50
18
50
26
40
50
45
38
44
35
50
25
22
50
50
50
10
10
26
38
5
50
13
30
50
10
50
48
50
25
48
48
50
26
18
44
10
20
50
50
50
50
30
45
18
50
50
27
50
50
25
25
26
40
50
45
45
40
34
30
35
25
50
24
25
35
30
35
40
26
50
38
50
35
50
50
50
18
10
30
30
18
28
10
30
10
26
13.5
26
30
45
10
26
26
50
25
50
15
38
50
10
50
26
10
5
10
10
10
0
5
26
10
17
10
10
50
36
40
10
30
44
50
42
40
44
50
50
38
26
50
50
40
50
20
47
38
50
50
35
45
50
50
50
50
50
25
45
50
50
40
50
50
50
40
40
50
50
35
50
50
50
30
In my opinion, the first case is not the right case. Because it seems like that there is pattern (like step function) but in that ca
They lack an explanation of sample data(-16), and also there is no detail values for explaining the results(-10)
No explain on result graphs. (-12 each).
Regularity of data can be expressed and processed using linear regression by adding independent variable "t". So this case
First case : Good case but they didn't explain the result with the value of R^2. The second case is good also, but same rem
a little lack of analysis of the result
do not consider the other case of the correct answer
Correct
Case 1- score(5, 8, 12), Case 2 - score(5, 8, 12)
Great!
Just the case of independent X. (three figrues are all random shape without any reason)
Do not consider other cases in the correct answer
didn't quite understand the solution

Perfect!
Well done
gj
You missed outliner case.
These cases are correct, but explanation of data and results is not clear.
Only one case is correct
Both answers doesn't contain the explanation of data
They only show the result without explanation of the data or the result
b.) -8 for no explanation of data, -24 for no explanation ( what is "obvious"?)
Well done.
For the second case, I think there is no explanation of the data. (There's only the results.)
One curve fitting is missing.
- data_explanation(0, Dataset is not correct)
- explanation(0, no explanation)
Answers are good, the only thing that, in my opinion, explanation of the second case is not sufficient.
Not enough of data description and results
case1) They did not provide a sample data(-8), They did not specify explanation of result(-5) case2) No explanation of resul
Lack of data and results description.
First one has all what's needed, but second one only plotted the data set. There's neither line nor explaination for how it wo
2case x
second case is correct but not much explained
Perfect
gj
suggested solution is far from solution TA suggested
I deducted 12 points on the second example, because they didn't give sufficient explanation about the results.
No detailed explanation of results
-
Okay, I got what they want to say but mischoice when they explain something, like data variables (I think this is the indepen
Answer lacks date example and description of the pattern of the data
Case1)No data(-8), No detail values (e.g., R^2) for explanation(-5) Case2) No data(-8), No detail values (e.g., R^2) for expl
You wrote nice answer and reason of first example is powerful.
None
Identified 2 valid cases (5 points + 5 points), and explained the poor fit of linear regression to the chosen data (12 points + 1
I understand what you're trying to convey but I think they lead to the same case that is the correct model is non-linear and th
.
Both case 1 and case 2 are about nonlinear model. explanation about result is not enough. (We can not judge it is good mo
Both examples focus on the same case.
all of answer are not correct

25 + 5 + 8
.
Both are the same case. Good explanation of the data and the result for the latter.
All good
you gave reallt good examples for this question!
For each case, 5 points for the correct case provision, 5 points for data explanation by showing graph, and 10 points for res
I gave them full point for first example, but 5pt for second example because they didn't explain how to generate the data an
data
Need more explanation in detail about your data
There are two answers, but no explanations of the result.
good
For both cases 1 and 2, the team identified correct examples of cases when linear regression is a poor model for the data (
No detailed explanation of results
They answered correct example and explaining
good
Good explanation.
For the first part you have copied the the image from some where else so i deduct 10 mark(so u got 15), and for the second
R^2 ,
Both cases are correct and have enough explanations
good cases
No explanation in terms of R^2 (-4 pts for each answer)
Both of the examples are correct but they lack of explanation about the results.
case 1) There are no explanation of result (-4) 21, case 2) lack of explanation data(-1), no result but little explanation (-8) 16
Case 1 : Correct example(Nonlinear model). But there's no explanation on the result figure(-6 points). And lack of explanatio
Case 2 : Correct example(Outliers). But there's no data example(-8) and example results(-12). And terminology is ambiguou
The second case (overfitting due to outliers) lacks the explanation of the sample data and the results of the linear regressio
First case provided simple explanation, data distribution, results without explanation (19 points), and second case provided
I do not know how the sample data map is set up
case 1 is well explained. but case 2 is not showing the example data case.
classification overfitting , .
Google docs doesn't give the functionality of set symbols? And in the second case, after "However", what does "it" means?
Good
enough cases and cases.
explanation about result is missing in case1. result and data explanations are missing in case2.
no answer provided
Question 3 is not answered
.
No answer was provided.
Did not answer
empty answer :(
No answer for the Q3
Nothing explained on Question 3
they answer anything
didn't solve q3
There is no example data and result.
According to Solution, need to describe the pattern of data
it's good, but there are not the graph.
0 points for the explanation of the result
No plots were provided with generated data.

This team do not provide any examples. However, IMO, they show the overall explanation for which data could not be suita
Gave two cases but with no specific data or no specific result by running elice.
Two cases.
case1) No explanation for the data and the result.
x(-12)
case2) x(-12)
Both case only has results, no description. -12
you gave example of data, graph. But you need to write reason for that. I think.
It's nice but could be bit more descriptive.
all good (-3) (-3)
case1)
case2) (-3) (-5)
case1 given data is okay, but explanation about the case and data are not perfect. 4 + 4 + 10 = 18.
case2 same reason for case1. 4+ 4+ 10 = 18
Both cases are correct answer and they have appropriate explanations and the results. But i think both answers show the s
For case 2, it is similar with case 1 . they didn't describe and explain the results with graph.
They show data examples and explain how to generate them, but do not suggest why their equation would not be a good m
There should be explanation of the results with graphs.
lack
caseof1
result
explanation
explanationincase1 and justsimple
case 6was written in case2
.
case 2 , non-linear model regression ,
Explanation of results : Brief explanation of the fitted model which is insufficient with no visual or statistical description of the
second case, there is no data and result.
Case 1: x2 = 2*x1 will make Y=w0+(w1+2w2)*x1, which is linear.

The first case is quite good, but the second case is quite vague
Showing pattern of data sets by using graph(8)
Trained linear regression line is fitted (5) and high error between line and data is stated, but R square value meaning correla
case 1: the nonlinear case is correct (5 points) and the explanation of the data is exist (8 points). and your team generated
case 2:
case1) there is
a caseexample
(-1)and data
explanation
(5 points + 8 points).
R^2 there isn't the explanation about the result.
(-9)
case2) (-1) (-12)
(a) y scale regression .
case1 3(nonlinear model is okay to answer, but general linear regression can care this model) + 8+6(only result)=17
case2 2(too narrow case) + 6(no significant explanation for this narrow case)+6(result only)=14
Both cases lack expressions for data and results.
There should be explanation of the results.
The slope of the graph has to be increased but it is decreasing.
There is no explanation of the result
The explaination for case 2 is not enough. I know it's obvious but you didn't explain why 'regression line would always return
For both cases 1 and 2, the team identified correct examples of cases when linear regression is a poor model for the data (
No explanation about the data or the result.
case1 is same for example in the question, so 3+8+4=15
case2 5+7+8=20.
.
Case1 : this case already exist in the problem. (0pt)
Case2 : Right case, but wrong answer for explanation of the data and result(15pts)
no specific description of data set. -4
only results, not description of result. -6
first answer is right, but second answer may be wrong .because when the case is about classification, we can classify with t
Poor explanation about the production of data
Two cases have the explanation of the data, but the data itself is not recognizable.
Explained and gave only one data case without explaining the result.
Only one answer, insufficient explanation
Okay
You should provide two different cases but there is only one case without explanation nor result of regression(R square valu
Case 1 : Correct example(Nonlinear model). But there's no explanation on the result figure(-6 points). And lack of explanatio
Case 2 : null(-25 points)
-
- no data explanation
- no result and explanation
-25 for one case. -12 for explanation (for your case linear regression works fine since it can still catch the trend of the data)
One more case is needed.
You provided only one example so miss 25 marks out of 50. For the example you provided since you haven't explain you re
1
One case. Explanation of the data by the graph. No explanation for the result.
No data and enough explanations... only 1 case.
just one answer but explanation is not sufficient
Second case is missing. First cases got full credit.
(a) 3 + 4 + 8, (b) 0. (a)-The explanation that the noise is high is too ambiguous. Specific case is needed. Additional explana
You showed one example data only, but you didn't explain how the
results support your cases. You shoud explain your cases with some values such as R^2 value.
no answer was given
write down smth for points
There is no answer.
No answer provided
.
There is no answer.
They did not answer the question
No answer
Cheer up :)
linear regression .
ok
correct and result explanation
I understood how the distribution of the function is, but the explanation of generating data is not enough.
The first case was two parallel linear distribution. but if it two distribution are close enough, linear regression line may explai
Case good, data good, but result arent explained.
Cases and data are good, but the explanation why R^2 is so small is insufficient.
no case, no data, no result
- no result and explanation
+ I can't understand your answer, but only your data example of 3. And there are no any results(e.g., screenshots) of your li
1. Zero-mean Distribution
2 case x, , x
Only case explanation is given. The data explanation and proper result explanation are not given.
You show examples, but the data you generate with some text is not clear to understand it. You should show the data with f
An alternative way to create and present data, but since you understood the theory and concept behind, you get almost full
The answer does not seem right.
(a) 13, (b) 13 (both of them, no description of how to generate the data and result explanation/comparison)
Nice, but poor explanation for both cases.
Case1:5+8+10(The answer has only result.)
Case2:5+8+10(The answer has only result.)
correct
two case: 10, two data: 16, no explanation about results: 0
Lack of explanation for the data and the results
Case 1: 5 point for case, 0 point for data explanation, and 8 point for result
Case 2: same with case 1
5 + 5 for two cases. For the first case, generation of data not explained. For both cases, explanation of results are not enou
First example had an explanation of data, and received partial points for having results without an explanation (14 points). S
good
Not enough explanation for the first example, second example is good
- lack of explanation on result 4
* total 14

The explanation (in both cases) is quite short. However, with the results (graphs and data), they proved they are right.
nice
perfect
Each case has 25 points. 5 points for the case, 8 points for explanation of the
data, 12 points for explanation of the result. In Your case you havent identified each case properly which makes it difficult to
Answer too general and vague
They gave right examples, randomness and non-linear (1st: +5, 2nd: +5). And there are explanations about datas using gra
For each case, the author provides short explanation why linear regression doesn't work, and the result by showing the plot
.
not including outlier problem, but well stated the situation not effective for linear regression. their explanation is reasonable
For each case, 5 points for the case, 8 points for the explanation of the data. But I gave 4 out of 12 points for the explanatio

two cases are the same example : non linearity
There is no explanation for result. There is only result.
So I assigned the partial points(7/12) according to the guideline
, .
each case earned 5 points for case, 8 points for explanation of model, but the explanation for the result was omitted.
The answers are shown by example figure and they are correct but, not very well explain about result.
They showed data and results in form of graph only, without detailed explanation
The team understands worst linear regression, but their example isn't sufficient for understanding.
case 1) There are no explanation of result (-4) 21 - only 1 case and 3 results
Good reasoning and proper graphical backups.
only one case(non linear) is stated / there is no explanation of the data and the result.
-
no explanation of results
both cases don't contain explanation of the results
For both cases, no graphs or exact result(value of R^2 or RSS) is given.
In case 2, there is no explain the result
Right dataset, but not too artificial for case 1
no analysis of result whatsoever
The first case is a polynomial regression so it's a kind of linear regression but with some X variables missing from the mode
Second case : good idea but I think that they didn't have the time to finish and to really study this case. There is no result (R
It seems that cluster can still exist in linear related data
They have shown clearly cases where linear regression is not suitable + code to generate data but not explanation for resul
both cases lack explanation of the results, second case doesn't show the data or how we can generate it
They used the code to support their idea well.
Provided proper explanation for each case, data generation method, and the regression results
Second case is missing R^2 score or relevant scores.
Good explanation.
showed pattern and data points but no explanation
They didnt explain the each case, they just mentioned it and copy their data... I think the example is correct, but in the end b
R^2 score or relevant scores are missing.
You don't give graph and R^2, so I give 2 points for each. (-20) and I only give 1 point(-4) because you actually give only on
No explanation about the result
Case 1,2 both fall under the category of "correct model is nonlinear". Therefore case 2 is redundant. (-25)
The case of sine or cosine is that the model is nonlinear, so it one case and no explanation of the result
correct
there is no explanation of the result
need explanation of the result
The criterion for explaining results of question 3 is "12 points. Explaining the results with graphs, R^2 or whatever values are
Case (1): Outliers, Case(3): nonlinear model
no explanation of result both graphs
results support your cases. That's why you lose 24 points of your score.
You shoud explain your cases with some values such as R^2 value.
Good work and nice plots.
They gave right examples, binary values and randomness (1st: +5, 2nd: +5). And there are explanations about datas using
I don't think that the second case is not a good choice for this question and they don't explain the data and the results
they only answered for one case.

The answer should contain two different cases, but they only showed one.
They gave one good case and its explanation, but they gave any other cases. In the problem, it is specified that we need to
only one case with data (5p) and graph(6p). no explanation
you find the suitable case that does not fit in to linear regression. However, as you can see in the provided solution you lack
not including outlier situation, and not reasonable situation that is not effective situation for linear regression
One more case is needed.
They didn't use their X value example. And explanation wasn't satisfied about condition.
Just one case example and no explanation of data. So just 12 points for explanation of the result.
No data examples
Only one case
Only suggested one proper case and data distribution
(1) 5 points for the correct case provision, 4 points for data explanation by showing graph, and 0 point for result explanation
(2) 0 for the second case which is not provided.
They showed only data and results in form of graph without detailed explanation for a case, and I think a set of data that ha
.
1st case is not in the solution / 2nd case is perfect!

Good explanation for data but lack of explanation for results
none
Explanation is very good with appropriate results in the end.
Good answers, but a little bit lacks of explanations.
Although I consider their examples really really simple (maybe to simple to be considered a prove that the concept of linear
Great conclusions, but lack of concrete reasoning. Will be good to see graphical or mathematical backups (R-squared value
showed pattern and data but no explanation of result (graph or R^2 values)
- (still) poor explanation on result 3
* total 16
They only show the result without explanation of the data or the result
Your need to describe the pattern of the data and detail the case. You also have explain the results obtained.
Do not consider all cases of the correct answer
There was no explanation of the regression result.
.
I assume that the second case is like implicit independent variable
Good
No explanation for case. Only for data exists.
.
-
Excellent examples and compact explanations. I learned from your answer. Good!
2 . .
25 points for the first example. 0 points for the second example, as this was in essence the same case as the first example.
The problem wasn't that clear about what "case" means, so I gave it a partial point
There is no explanation of the result.
second suggestion is right, but first one about saturated data may return linear regression whose slope is close to zero
Actually, both case1, 2 belong to "Correct model is nonlinear" case
The data seems very fine. (+8 for each case)
However, they didn't write any results from their own data. (0 points)
lack of description for results
Both cases are about nonlinear case (5 points). And there is a explanation of the data generation (8 points). However, there
two case are all correct. but they are all same category which is 'correct model is nonlinear'. so I gave the half point.
In both cases, they gave good example data (5*2 points) and the explanations (8*2 points). However, there is no results on
there is no result explanation in both case 1 and case 2
no explanations
no graph
(a) 5 + 6 + 0, (b) 5 + 6 + 0. The case is fine, but the description is very poor.
Both two cases have no explanation of the result. Two cases got 13 points each.
Case 1 : Correct example(Nonlinear model). But there's no result of the model(-12 points). And lack of explanation for data(
Case 2 : 'case3' in the answer sheet is admitted as a nonlinear model example. But there's no result of the model(-12 points
Only the datas are mentioned.

-
For case 1: 5 point for case, 0 point because there's no data explanation, and 6 point because they only give the result (and
For case 2: same with case 1
Good examples but need a little bit more explanation
Case 1- score(5, 8, 12), Case 2 - score(5, 8, 12)
-4 for each answer (No explanation in terms of R^2, and R^2 is high)
- result is given but no result explanation (+6)
Both cases are reasonable, but there is no explanation for results. For example, first case seems to have no problem since
no explanation of both graphs
Interesting explanations. But someone may be neither man nor woman.
no data are given
Although you answer case1,2 and graph, all of them are not correct.
I cannot understand the author's answer sheet. For both cases, the author briefly explain the case, and result without actua
6 points for the explanation of the result (only the second case is explained)
.
They gave only one correct example, no code, no data, no explanation
I think that the [case 1] graph is incorrect compared to their explanation case.
[case 2] has no real data case and explanation is lack.
Trained linear regression line is fitted(5), but we do not know whether R square value is high or not in this plot, so exact valu
case 1 is already presented in the question. case 2 is totally wrong answer.
There is no evidence that they used the given code to support their answer.
R2 of 1 indicates that the regression line perfectly fits the data.
Case 2 lack of result and result explanation
more detailed explanation is needed
case1. give answer(5), give data(8), but explanation is wrong: random y value doesn't always give R^1 = 1
case2. wrong answer. this question is not about overfitting. the answer should discribe about the case when linear regressio
Both cases don't contain explanation of results
case2 is not a problem of data with linear model.
case1 R^2 -6 , case2
half point for data explanation : Your group do not show the data
Case, explanation of the data and result are clear.
Good
-
(a) 17 (no description of how to generate the data/resule comparion), (b) 21 (no description of how to generate the data)
.
Actually, if R^2 is low, we cannot say anything without further discussion and data analysis. Please, take statistics for more e
Deducted 10 points because there were no graphs nor visualizations
No example data provided.
.
.
No figure explanation
No examples of data
0 points for the explanation of the data
0 points for the explanation of the result
Good explanations, but no data or graph supporting the answers

25 points for first case, 5 points for second case
perfect
all case good, data explanation is good.
but results aren't explained
I agree
Looks good to me.
Correct
Impressive!
Missing R^2 score.
No R^2...
(a) no R^2 data (-6) , (b) no result (-12)
They are only show the case which "Correct model is nonlinear ". and no example real data case.
not enough description details
good
in the second example, any result (best fit line) should be shown
First example is given in the problem. (0)
Second example doesn't show the result (R^2 or predicted response val) (-12)
. 'Justify each case by generating the example data
2 cases of scatter and nonlinear model, each data of explanation and result exist
The cases were correct, but the explanations are not enough.
The result is not explained in detail why it's not fit for linear regression.
For each case, 5 points for the case, 8 points for the explanation of the data. I gave the 4 out of 12 points for very simple ex
The answer contains all the explanation of each case, data, and the result graph.
+ 0 (data pattern not explained enough)
+ 0 (result, not mentioned about R^2)
(b) X Y independent learning linear regression
need explanation of the result
They can explain their answer and using well X value like good example. But they didn't have enough explanation about the
Case2 has no detailed explanation of result
Second case: Vague explanations. By random, are you saying X variable is not fixed?
3. case 1. 5 + 8('the response Y is separated into zero and one') + 12('the estimated y value can be infinitely large when the
case 2. 5+8+6(If linear regression does not predict data set well(bad model), then R^2 should be close to zero. not too big)
No explanation about the data.
nothing
I was wondering why your first data is bad example for linear regression. And it seems that your explanation is quite not rea
Both answers doesn't contain the explanation of data, and the result of first example is not explained enough
Correct
-
Case(a): nonlinear model, Case(b): random variable X
No data explained, poor description of each data.
In case 2, quadratic dependence on the target value can be modeled in linear regression with basis function expansion.
There are no data results. So I assigned -12 for each case.
Insufficient explanations for results
No data result and explanation on result. (-20 for each)\
Quadratic function is also linear. Wrong case (-5)
.
GPA and the variation of GPA is really huge.", but I cannot understand why linear regression doesn't work when the variatio
increase the capacity of our model", which I cannot understand. The author tried to explain about their thought, so I gave 4
There is no explanation about data sets and regression graph
For the case 1 , they explain the data and describe why the data cannot be represented using linear regression. they also e
For the case2 , they also describe the data and describe the results with graph correctly.
just right answer that Examples of the cases 1,2 but the other are not correct answer.
Answer is right and fully explained and results is also good.
case 1),case 2) similar cases(-2) 48
3.(a) 5+ 8('The data looks like to cross shape X in xy plane')+12('R^2 as 0.0 for that case')
(b) 5 + 8('The data looks like to a circle in xy plane') + 12('n R^2 as 0.0 for that case')
two cases are not different
.
The team understands worst linear regression. And they present explanation and examples well.
Nice examples :)
Detailed explanations are missing
- They do not have detail reasons for why the proposed data is not working on linear regression algorithms. Just mentionin
- No results analysis in here
They explained correctly about the question 3. However, the explanations about the results are not enough.

Lack of explanation of data and results.
Good examples, clear explanation
They gave right examples, same independent variables and outliers (1st: +5, 2nd: +5). And there are explanations about da
They provided good cases, with showing the plots and proper explanations for the data.
example linear regression
lack of explanation of result
-
- They explain only one reason to answer "why".
- No results analysis in here
it's perfect.
-
briefly describes the data set. -4
only result, no description. -6
Excellent analysis for case 2 regarding periodic functions
Case, explanation of data and results are well described with graphs and statistical measures.
Your two case saying same category which is 'correct model is nonlinear'. so I gave a half point
They explained the data and the results with graphs.
I see the explanation of data and example but i can't see any explaining the results with graphs(R squre value)
lack of description for first case
The team provided well visualized examples.
Fine examples, but maybe with relatively simple kernel, that might be able to handle with linear regression.
first example not well explained
For both cases, cases and explanation for each case are ok, but the explanation for results is not really good. -> 20 for each
No explanation about the data
The second case seems good, but codes on this case are also omitted. (-6)
Good. However there are some missing points (lack of graph explanation, graph reused). As the provided solution weighted
(a) case is not a problem of the linear regression, (b) is right
None
(a) 1 + 4 + 12, (b) 3 + 4 + 0. (a)-It talks about the difference between the input range and the output range, not the data set
Case .
Two graph is same.
I think whole data is included in training data for case2 butm case 1 is not
both figures look the same
need result explanation
There is no explanation for result. There is only result.
So I assigned the partial points(7/12) according to the guideline
perfect
For the case 2, they also choose the data which is not suitable for linear regression and describe how they generate the da
These cases are correct, explanation is not very clear.
good
No problem
explanations about result, data are missing.
there was only case explanation. no comment on data & result.
no data, no graph for each case
Problems are correct but the demonstration is not clear.
First example was worth 13 points, as a case and data was given, but no results. Second example gave 5 points, as only a
Case1:5+6(no describe about data)+2(No results and no explanation).
Case2:5+8+2(No results and no explanation).
There should be explanation of the
data and the result.
+ 8 (data pattern explained)
+ 0 (no result, no explanation)
there is no data and explanation of results
No explanation of the results.
2 (no detailed explanation about the pattern of data)
0 (no R^2 value shown, no result)
5+8+5+8
Need more explanation in detail about your data
They answered correct examples about question but result explainings are good but not fully explained
lack of data and result explanation
There was no explanation of the regression result.
scatter case is that X variable is random and binary classification case is that model is nonlinear
case 1 is wholly correct but case 2 is incorrect.
None.
The cases are correct, but the explanation of the data and the result is insufficient.
Did well, but in the second case, R^2 is quite high. So I guess you generated wrong dataset so it doesn't validate your insist
Good
Two Cases mentioned with no further explanations.
ok
No explanation of the results.
This team found two cases (I think the first one is about nonnormality and the second one is about nonlinear data). Howeve
just one case, no data, no result
- data_explanation(8): 0, Sorry but no explicit data is included
- explanation(13): 0, And no metrics and explanation
The first example is not fully specified. (We can get good prediction for large independent variable even though we have on
No data provided for both cases -> 5 + 5 = 10 points
no solution
I think skewed data still can represent part of linear shape, so that linear regression can go well
in both cases, the results of running Linear Regression are not explained
They did not explain data examples and the results with graphs
They did not generate the example data and code. They only mention a data in the demo in the class material (5 points) an
Only explained in words
No mention about data and the result
Good
(5+8+12)+(5+0+6 out of 12) .
There is no example data but it is well explained.
given cases are correct, but no data and results explanation.
- (almost impossible) to deduct result (or explanation) from data 6
* total 15
a.)-6 for not mention non-linear model
Great reasoning, and proper graphical backups.
data set from one case is missing
The team understands worst linear regression, but their example and explanation aren't sufficient for understanding.
Case 1- score(5, 8, 6), not enough to explain about the result
Case 2 - score(5, 8, 12).
- data_explanation(8): 8
- explanation(12): 12
Despite explanation of result, I think it is almost right.
in first case, there is lack of explanation of the result.
no explanation of both graphs
explanation result showing

They use good example, and explain as well. But, they didn't explain how R^2 worked in their example, and in Figure(2) the
Nothing
The first case was not really convincing. The second case is quite reasonabl, but still lack of clear explanation.
, , . polynomial 3
second case is already in question3
2 valid cases, well elaborated
.
second case is already in question3
Linear regression can't be done well if given independent variables have nothing to do with estimating Y. Answer's case is to
They suggest data examples and explain how to generate the data. Also, they explain the result with graphs with regard to R
Stating there is no possible solution by using R square value, 0, meaning that there is no correlation between real value and
Correct
Good
Answer sheet
did well but the second example is very similar to the first example
5 points deducted because both cases are examples of non-linear models.
Correct answers
gj
Outliner case is missed
nice job
Nothing
perfect
-3. . -4
Case1:5+4(No describe about data, but there is a scatter diagram)+6(Explained the results with graphs&R2. But R2 on data
Case2:5+8+12
All three parts for scoring at each case are satisfied.
Correct cases, data explanations, and results
lack of description
Two cases are properly suggested with the explanation of data and result.
it's perfect
For case 1, Explanation was good but I guess the result doesn't support. Maybe Data is not appropriate.
Sum
80
74
65
80
82
50
100
80
98
75
60
50
100
100
100
100
87
80
55
100
83
60
51
65
95
57
56
84
55
60
58
81
61
50
100
100
65
83
83
100
90
85
74
90
100
92
90
100
100
60
90
97
50
75
100
68
65
100
90
78
65
59
77
76
100
72
83
100
100
100
80
72
95
85
92
76
82
63
74
64
70
82
55
75
90
98
58
34
35
35
35
35
35
35
33
35
25
60
85
100
45
74
66
50
50
61
88
68
100
100
100
81
86
100
61
43
61
53
67
61
53
62
70
91
76
67
95
81
70
72
70
76
98
72
70
80
100
95
55
75
90
75
90
43
35
100
48
59
100
35
43
70
62
55
53
50
65
65
55
25
20
35
20
35
25
33
20
40
25
75
75
80
81
67
65
68
30
46
25
58
56
30
30
60
45
71
76
87
90
56
75
66
78
84
100
75
71
88
90
100
100
66
40
92
66
87
90
79
100
65
88
67
61
75
64
71
65
99
40
60
76
66
66
73
90
55
60
65
76
75
96
90
78
100
71
65
66
71
76
63
53
100
71
76
92
100
66
61
98
78
60
74
80
70
61
55
60
70
70
47
35
51
65
43
52
52
40
50
70
63
70
78
65
70
75
98
71
65
60
61
60
71
66
100
75
40
31
75
85
50
55
65
61
60
60
46
70
48
60
64
61
42
51
62
48
64
35
30
100
32
64
67
72
58
41
46
56
60
20
38
46
81
45
55
62
25
74
65
68
33
66
65
72
64
92
90
65
73
30
80
49
70
90
61
51
40
55
70
64
90
68
90
70
90
94
61
61
67
75
80
95
78
48
60
85
75
69
90
53
85
61
75
100
80
87
94
85
100
50
72
100
100
100
45
50
66
78
35
100
47
70
100
60
100
98
100
75
96
98
100
61
68
94
44
50
90
87
79
95
66
95
68
100
95
72
100
100
55
75
76
85
93
95
95
90
84
70
85
75
85
67
75
75
80
73
80
76
90
88
90
85
90
100
95
58
55
70
80
58
67
50
75
50
76
58.5
73
80
95
50
71
76
85
60
75
50
73
90
45
90
51
45
25
60
40
60
30
35
61
45
52
45
40
80
61
75
35
48
79
89
67
67
71
70
83
46
80
70
70
80
55
82
81
100
95
85
90
85
95
100
100
99
75
95
100
100
90
100
100
100
90
90
100
100
85
100
100
100
80
Team ID Average Score
1 81.57
2 90.71
3 60.00
4 79.43
5 65.62
6 90.89
7 92.38
8 81.88
9 90.50
10 87.60
11 75.60
12 34.88
13 68.88
14 93.57
15 61.38
16 80.80
17 84.38
18 62.57
19 59.62
20 30.38
21 76.00
22 45.62
23 78.29
24 88.62
25 84.50
26 72.29
27 73.00
28 83.00
29 73.14
30 83.00
31 70.00
32 53.75
33 73.00
34 76.12
35 64.43
36 61.50
37 58.86
38 58.00
39 51.00
40 69.50
41 79.83
42 63.50
43 85.14
44 73.56
45 79.38
46 92.62
47 65.86
48 99.88
49 79.25
50 89.12
51 87.50
52 79.43
53 90.43
54 66.29
55 78.50
56 74.25
57 47.62
58 58.29
59 76.57
60 84.00
61 97.14
62 97.86
63 96.43

Quiz 1 Grading Comments

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Quiz 1 Grading Comments

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Graded Team ID Question 1 Score

The explanation is not enough on Question 1(b)

There is no explanation about p-value

all of answer and explanations are correct

The definition & function expression are included in the answer.

all of answer are not correct

No plots were provided with generated data.

Case 1: x2 = 2x1 will make Y=w0+(w1+2w2)x1, which is linear.

they only answered for one case.

explanation result showing

Potrebbero piacerti anche