Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Committee Evaluation Form

    Uploaded by

    Farhana Muneer
    52 views1 page
    This document provides an evaluation criteria for assessing synopses or proposals for PhD, MS, and MSc computer science theses at Government College University, Faisalabad. It outlines sections that should be included like the title, abstract, introduction, literature review, methodology, and expected findings. Criteria for each section focus on clearly defining the problem, objectives, approach, and contributions. References are also assessed for relevance and compliance with formatting guidelines. The evaluator rates each criteria and signs off to approve the synopsis.

    Original Description:

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    This document provides an evaluation criteria for assessing synopses or proposals for PhD, MS, and MSc computer science theses at Government College University, Faisalabad. It outlines sections that should be included like the title, abstract, introduction, literature review, methodology, and expected findings. Criteria for each section focus on clearly defining the problem, objectives, approach, and contributions. References are also assessed for relevance and compliance with formatting guidelines. The evaluator rates each criteria and signs off to approve the synopsis.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    52 views1 page

    Committee Evaluation Form

    Uploaded by

    Farhana Muneer
    This document provides an evaluation criteria for assessing synopses or proposals for PhD, MS, and MSc computer science theses at Government College University, Faisalabad. It outlines sections that should be included like the title, abstract, introduction, literature review, methodology, and expected findings. Criteria for each section focus on clearly defining the problem, objectives, approach, and contributions. References are also assessed for relevance and compliance with formatting guidelines. The evaluator rates each criteria and signs off to approve the synopsis.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 1

    Department of Computer Science

    Government College University, Faisalabad.

    Student Name:_________________________________________ Cell #: ____________________


    SECTION EVALUATION CRITERIA
    1. Title is well defined
    2. Scope is covered
    Title 3. Technique/Framework/Algorithm, etc. is well mentioned
    4. Application of the research is outlined.
    5. Other : _________________________________________________
    1. Clear statement of problem is described.
    2. Objectives are well identified.
    3. Novelty of technique or method is clearly mentioned.
    Abstract
    4. Scope of research / limitations are clearly summarized.
    5. Expected outcome are mentioned.
    6. Other : _________________________________________________
    1. Problem is well identified.
    2. Motivation is well elaborated.
    3. Problem statement is clearly, precisely and accurately comprehended.
    4. Research questions : minimum (3 for PhD and 1 for MS / MSc) are described.
    Introduction
    5. Research objectives: minimum (3 for PhD and 1 for MS / MSc) are described.
    6. Mapping between problem statement, questions and objectives is illustrated.
    7. Expected contribution is well specified.
    8. Scope of research is clearly mentioned.
    9. Other : _________________________________________________
    1. The literature review is relevant to the problem (minimum 15 research papers)
    2. The literature review is inclusive and comprehensive
    3. The literature review is critically written and is balanced up to the mark
    Review of
    4. Summary of literature review is presented using tables/graphs/taxonomy/mindmap etc.
    Literature
    5. Other : _________________________________________________
    1. Proposed methodological diagram of given problem is presented.
    2. Different phases of proposed methodology are well described and presented.
    3. Data input / output for each phase is well described.
    4. Source/destination of each data input and output are clearly specified.
    Methodology
    5. Research techniques / methods / procedures / framework etc., are properly justified.
    6. Detail of reliable dataset / benchmarks is provided.
    7. Other : _________________________________________________
    1. The expected key findings of the study are very clearly stated.
    Expected 2. The expected findings are highly consistent with the objectives of the study.
    Findings 3. Other : _________________________________________________
    References 1. Sources of reference are very reliable (from verified journals or original sources) .
    Language 2. All sources of citations are in the text / references .
    3. Compliance to the format of GCUF’s Thesis Writing Guide and the use of good and
    consistent writing style.
    4. Figures and tables from other sources are cited properly.
    5. Figures / tables are explained in the text.
    6. Plagiarism report as per HEC rules.
    7. Other : _________________________________________________

    Evaluator Name : Signatures :

    GCUF-CS-SYNOPSIS EVALUATION FORM [PhD(CS) , MS(CS) and MSc(CS)]

    You might also like