tanya-jp / ann-cas741 Goto Github PK

Hi @rnorouziani ,

Please review my MG and MIS.

Thanks,
Tanya

In 3.1, the both user responsibilities you mentioned look the same.

To improve modularity, it's suggested to connect the Input and Output Modules via an independent module, such as a Control Module, rather than integrating the Input Module directly within the Control Module. This could clarify module interactions and responsibilities.

In section 8.3.2 exported access programs, there is a set_class method, while in 8.4.4 there is a get_class method, I guess one of them is a typo?
Also in 14.4.5 you misspell "calculate".

There appears to be a discrepancy in the documentation between set_class() (mentioned in 8.3.2) and get_class() (explained in 8.4.4).

As in the checklist: "Secrets are nouns (generally)"

It would be better if the secrets in section 7.3.1, 7,3.2 could be phrased as nouns.

Hi Dr. Smith (@smiths ),

Please review my MG and MIS.

Thanks,
Tanya

In functional requirements R2 is "Verify the given inputs are in correct form and satify the required physical constraints given in the Table 1. The system provides feedback by displaying the classification esults for user confirmation." Which seems need to be break to 2 requirements.

@AtiyehSayadi please review my SRS. Thanks!

Hi Dr. @smiths,

Please review my VnV Plan.

Thanks,
Tanya

To make the diagram easier to understand and show how the modules interact more clearly, it's recommended to redraw Figure 1 with all arrows pointing downwards.

In Section 3.5, the indentation of the paragraphs is inconsistent. Some sentences are indented, while others are not.

How are the local functions used in sections 12.4.5 and 13.4.5? I might be wrong but I thought they should be related to the export access program somehow. Feel like the local functions you write are more like the functions you are going to implement in the software.
Also, there are functions rgb2gray, prep pixels, and flat data in both 12.4.5 and 13.4.5 with the same name, are they going to be overwritten?

There are lots of modules in your project so I think it might be helpful to order modules logically? Also in your use hierarchy in MG, the Input Preparing and Preprocessing Modul uses the Input Image Module, but this is not shown in the MIS (Section 12.2)

Hi Dr. Smith,

Please review my problem statement.
https://github.com/tanya-jp/ANN-CAS741/blob/main/docs/ProblemStatementAndGoals/ProblemStatement.pdf

Thanks

In Table 3, Question 5 appears somewhat ambiguous. Is it referring to the system's ability to recover from errors? Additionally, regarding Question 9, is it intended to highlight potential drawbacks of the system? If so, this seems slightly similar to Question 10. Could you please clarify?

@rnorouziani please review my SRS. Thanks!

The Scope of the program could be more specific. You can mention the type of images your program works with, for example it only works with images that consist of only one object.

Hi Yi-Leng,

Please review my VnV Plan.

Thanks,
Tanya

Section 4.2.4 on Portability does not specify which operating systems the software is expected to run on.

In Mathematical Notation, Typographic Conventions you mentioned the matrix and vectors are shown by bold letters but in the doc there are not.
SRS_Taniya.pdf

In the description column of Table 1, one of the sentences is missing a period.

The documentation does not mention Environment Variables for loading pictures from outside the application scope. Including this information could enhance the document by clearly outlining how external resources are managed.

I noticed that there are no figures presented in your document. It might be worth considering the removal of "List of Figures" section from the Table of Contents if it remains unused.

If I am understanding correctly from the checklist, the transition in Access Routine Semantic is referred to the change of the states. But I think in your MIS, some transitions are more like explanation of function. Probably that is because of the phrasing, maybe you could consider adjusting that?

Hi Dr. @smiths ,

Here are my final documents:
Reflection
MG
MIS
SRS
VnV Plan
VnV Report

And this is my final source codes and test codes.

Thank you so much for your help and support!

Regards,
Tanya

Hyperlink the document names instead of the author names for easier access to the documents.

In 4.1.1 in Reliability you mentioned the program should be able to perform across various datasets, but in other part of the doc you have emphasis on working only with CIFAR-10 dataset. Which one is the case?

Hi @rnorouziani ,

Please review my VnV Plan.

Thanks,
Tanya

@tanya-jp when your problem statement is ready, please assign me an issue to review it.

In Table 1, under the "Valid?" column, the letters "Y" and "N" are used but not defined. It's recommended to define "Y" (Yes) and "N" (No) in the "Symbols, Abbreviations, and Acronyms" section to clarify their meaning.

Dr. @smiths please review my SRS. Thanks!

The CIFAR-10 dataset citation has a problem and shows question mark instead.

SRS_Taniya.pdf

For Section 1, organizing the content alphabetically could enhance readability. Additionally, given the frequent mentions of MG and MIS throughout the document, it might be beneficial to include them in Section 1 as well.

In the documentation, certain modules are missing from the traceability sections. Specifically, modules M7, M9, and M10 in the table 2, and M2, M3, M8, and M9 in the table 3. Including these could provide a complete overview of module interactions and responsibilities.

The system checks for both invalid input type and size simultaneously, which might not be efficient if the file type is already invalid. It would be better if you first check the input file type and throw an exception if it's invalid without proceeding to size verification.

The Input Verification Test focuses on specific data types, but it's unclear how the system handles other, unspecified data types. It is better to throw an exception for any data type not explicitly listed as valid in the verification test to enhance error handling.

1. The ANN Control Module, Input Classifier Module, Input Image Module, and Training Model Module, although defined as abstract data types, do not meet the condition to be considered ADT.

2. The Saved ANN Model Module, although defined as Record, does not meet the condition to be it.

Hi @CynthiaLiu0805 ,

Please review my MG and MIS.

Thanks,
Tanya

Update Repos.csv via a merge request to include your contact information.