Peer Review!!

[NotSakura]

Structure:

• Your read me isn't finsihed yet
• You are missing the r scripts in the scripts folder
• You are missing LLM usage!
• Your literature has irrelavant lit. Same with models in the outputs folder
• There is a folder called .DStore, do you need it for something?
• "number-sections: true" in the YAML file I think is for the table fo contents but you might have forgotten to write toc:true
• git hub link and doi missing!

Content:

• Great topic and I loved how you included social movements like BLM to motivate reader

• there seem to be formatting issues in the second paragraph towards the end where there is dashed lines.

• Methodology for the original paper gives users the chance to compare methodologies: good job!

• I would cite the original paper in the references and cross-reference to that instead of just putting the link in the middle

• What are the improper variables?

• I liked how you gave an instance of why some of the variables need to be properly cleaned in your explanation of variables -" If we do not control for age, then we will mistakenly conclude that black officers have a higher chance of getting the award"

• It seems like your results (which I assume currently is your data section since it has your result graphs) and the discussion section where you analyse the results seems to be put into one. I don't necessarily mind because it means while we have the reader's attention we give them a reason for why the results turn out the way they have but the common structure is to have the result section where you show the graphs and tables to be completely unbiased so showing trends is alright but I don't know if outright stating the conclusion is okay or not. (This is from the first and second paragraph of the data section)

• Everything else seems to be under construction so I won't comment too much on it, but it looks like its going pretty well!

• Also in the data section you are missing citations of r and the other packages you have used.

• Check your reference page!

Cool topic! Good luck!

[Kjeongwoo99]

Thank you!

[Kjeongwoo99]

The formatting and structure are the parts we haven't done yet. I agree with your comment on the data/results section being put into one, definitely need to find a better way to structure it.

[kakaomonk]

Thank you for your peer review. To the point "What are the improper variables?", we have already omitted all improper variables. We will consider including the reason why we removed the improper variables.