---
# System prepended metadata

title: HTML HW4 Grading Policy

---

# HTML HW4 Grading Policy

## P3
- 20 Points: Correct solution. Using $w=V\tilde{w}$ or taking gradient and compare are common reasonable solution.
- 15 Points: Almost correct: there are minor errors in the derivation. e.g. 
    - power of a vector
    - a vector is divided by another vector
    - vector dimension mismatch
    - did not assume $U$ is symmetric and gave the derivative the $U$ term to be $2U$ (should be $U+U^T$).
- 10 Points: Partially correct: some derivation is reasonable, but the result is wrong or has major errors, or the derivation is incomplete. e.g. 
    - you tried to compare two optimization formula seriously.
    - compute gradient
- 5 Points: The derivation is incorrect but you demonstrated reasonable efforts.
- 0 Points: No derivation is given or unrelated.


## P6
**Correct answer: (b)**

- 20 points
    Clear and correct solutions.
    
- 15 points
    There's a minor issue in your solutions, e.g.
    - Miss the identity after $\frac{2\lambda}{N}$.
    - do matrix devision


* 10 points
    A major issue, e.g.,
    - Calculation mistakes which leads to a wrong answer

* 0 points
    * Unrelated explanations
    * Without explanations

## P9
**Correct answer: (b)**
- 20 points: Correct
    - Any logical derivation.
- 15 points: Minor issues
    + Lack of clarity in some steps.
    + Missing $\mathbb{E}[\cdot]$ throughout the derivation.
    + Took $\bar{y}$ out from $\mathbb{E}[y_n\bar{y}]$. (The correct way of solving $\mathbb{E}[y_n\bar{y}]$ is by using the law $\mathbb{E}[XY]=\mathbb{E}[X]\mathbb{E}[Y]$ if $X$ is independent of $Y$)
- 10 points: Major issues
    + Assumed $y_n$ are drawn from a certain distribution.
    + Incorrect derivation of $\mathbb{E}[\bar{y}^2]$.

- 5 points: Showed some reasonable effort
    + Fundamentally wrong.
    + Assumed $\bar{y}=0$.

- 0 points: Did not show any steps
    + No pages selected.
## P10
**Correct answer: (a)**

- 20 points: correct solution
    + Basically, if you convince me you can derive the correct $E_{in}$ and probability (showing how it would result in an error), you will get a total score
    
- 15 points: minor issue
    + Writing $+-+-$, $-+-+$ or OXOX, XOXO without explaining what they represent (the order of the vectors)
    - Simply saying there are two combinations without any explanations (At least say we learned 2D perceptron from before...)


* 10 points: major issue
    + Correct probability but wrong $E_{in}$
    + Correct $E_{in}$ but wrong probability

* 0 points
    + Totally wrong or lack convincing calculation
