hw01 ready for grading

[vibudh2209]

@vincenzocoia @gvdr @ksedivyhaley @joeybernhardt @mynamedaike @pgonzaleze @derekcho

The link to Markdown file is this

The link to readme file is this

[yeonukkim]

Peer review from Yeonuk Kim:

Overall, you did a great job!

Advanced

• Using mapply and separate looks really great.
• The way you compared city 1 and 2 is really nice and logical. I learned a lot.
• Your code is overall concise and readable.
• Reflections help me to understand what you did.

Comments

• When you took top 200 entries, you could use this function head(200L) without mutating id.
• listviewer::jsonedit is good for showing a nested data frame. When I did my homework, I noticed that this function worked when you make a html document rather than a github document (md file).

[CassKon]

Singer Data

• Great solution to task 4 and explanation throughout of what you were trying to accomplish!
• Seems like everything worked well using mapply() - I had problems with my code when trying to use the map function
• I really enjoyed the creativity and effort that you put into your solution to compare the locations - AMAZING Work and very thorough!

Nested Data Frames

• Created nested data frame
• Created a function that allowed user to select fit of model - cool!
• Explored results from functions and looked into low r-squared values and large residual values

Overall really well done on the homework and you clearly put a lot of effort into thinking through the problems prior to coding. Really enjoyed your creative solutions to these problems! I can't actually think of much that you can improve on for the purposes of this assignment.

[derekcho]

Hi @vibudh2209 ! Here are some comments about your hw06:

• Great work for your first task! You work was well done and easy to follow along. You did a good job matching the longitude and latitude from the singer data and using revgencode to find the corresponding location, and then checking to see whether it matched the city variable in singer locations. I think that it would be beneficial to spend a bit more time explaining your custom functions comp and summ since it took a while to figure out that these did. However, overall this part was well done and demonstrated.
• Task 2 was also well done. Your explanations were clear and your code was easy to understand. For your report, you should try to make all plots using ggplot rather than base R. Base R plots are fine if you just want to take a quick look at something, but for work that you publish (including assignments), you should spend the time to make these look nicer! Your scatter plots did a good job of showing the outliers though.
• Nice work overall, your report was interesting and a pleasure to read. It was well organized and only had a few very minor issues. Your coding style was generally efficient, but I feel that it could benefit from a few more inline comments, especially when you are doing things that may not be obvious, but you did provide decent explanations too. Good work!!

Note: your mark (check minus, check, check plus) will be distributed later.