[X] Code documentation (e.g., comments) is sufficient
[X] Readme or other documentation updated if necessary
4. Best Practices
[X] No hardcoded values; constants used appropriately
[X] Security and privacy concerns addressed (e.g., no sensitive data exposed)
[ ] Code avoids repetition and promotes reusability
5. Additional Comments
Please provide feedback, areas of improvement, or other observations.
Need to compress the warnings in some places, apart from this everything looks good.
6. Recommendation
[ ] Approved - ready to be merged
[X] Approved with minor issues - can be addressed later
[ ] Requires changes - provide feedback and request another review
The following is the peer review of the project code by [name of team completing peer review]. The team members that participated in this review are
Deema Albluwi (Computational Linguistics, PhD) - @Deec0dez Rahul Bangad (Data Science, Master's) - @rahulbangad98 Swati Das (Data Science, Master's) - @Swati09Das Ansh Kumar Dev (Data Science, Master's) - @Anshkumardev Shakir Ahmed (Data Science, Master's)- @Shakir0585]
...
1. Purpose of Code
2. Code Quality
3. Documentation
4. Best Practices
5. Additional Comments
Please provide feedback, areas of improvement, or other observations. Need to compress the warnings in some places, apart from this everything looks good.
6. Recommendation