LLM usage is documented
LLM usage is not documented properly
Replication
Cannot find a link of SSRP in the paper. Looking forward to see them complete :)
Title
The overall title and structure is nice, but there is lack of subtitle to summary each paragraph (if possible)
Author, date, and repo
There are some parts of repo are doing in an appropriate way, but more details should be included. The format is unambiguous, which a unclearly Github included.
Data
Lacks of interpretations of the data variables and I think author can also explain what is the x-axis and y-axis means or labor it in the graph. Besides, instead of one graph that has been included in the paper, there is lack explanation of the source of the data and what methodology does the data use.
Model & Result & Discussion part
Looking forward to see more information can be covered in this part. One of my suggestion is to combine the model part and result part together, and clearly explain the model in one sector, but it is just my personal preference.
Measurement overweighted
Barely no discussion on the measurement of the dataset.
Cross-references
Lack of cross-reference in the graphs.
Referencing
Some of the materials have in-text citation, but not all of them and there is no Reference page to summary all the citation
Simulation
Lack of simulation part in the scripts
Test
No test code be included
More comment:
Lack of clarifying where is the paper that you try to replicate, which might lead to a deduction of reproducibility mark because people do not know what graph you are trying to reproduce.
R citation R is not appropriately cited
LLM usage is documented LLM usage is not documented properly
Replication Cannot find a link of SSRP in the paper. Looking forward to see them complete :)
Title The overall title and structure is nice, but there is lack of subtitle to summary each paragraph (if possible)
Author, date, and repo There are some parts of repo are doing in an appropriate way, but more details should be included. The format is unambiguous, which a unclearly Github included.
Data Lacks of interpretations of the data variables and I think author can also explain what is the x-axis and y-axis means or labor it in the graph. Besides, instead of one graph that has been included in the paper, there is lack explanation of the source of the data and what methodology does the data use.
Model & Result & Discussion part Looking forward to see more information can be covered in this part. One of my suggestion is to combine the model part and result part together, and clearly explain the model in one sector, but it is just my personal preference.
Measurement overweighted Barely no discussion on the measurement of the dataset.
Cross-references Lack of cross-reference in the graphs.
Referencing Some of the materials have in-text citation, but not all of them and there is no Reference page to summary all the citation
Simulation Lack of simulation part in the scripts
Test No test code be included
More comment: Lack of clarifying where is the paper that you try to replicate, which might lead to a deduction of reproducibility mark because people do not know what graph you are trying to reproduce.