Part 1: Review Other Teams' final video projects
Preventing Cyber Attacks with the Use of AI by Code Busters
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3i3bgh1ClTs
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k4WZz3PkMGQ
1. is the topic well covered?
They covered this topic well. They have a clear intro and conclusion and made sure to cover the nature of cybersecurity threats and how AI can be used to prevent and detect threats. They also included the challenges that have to be overcome to implement high quality AI solutions in this domain.
2. is the presentation clear?
Yes. The audio and video were of good quality and the slides were easy to read. They formatted key points as bulleted lists so that it was easy to follow.
3. how is the quality of the research?
Excellent. They have clearly done their homework.
4. how is the quality of the video production?
The video resolution was good and the slides were easy to read. In the video targeted at professionals, background music was not intrusive and was a good audio filler.
5. is the video engaging and interesting?
Yes. AI is on everyone's mind because of big company's in the news, the potential impact on the job market, and its use in industry and academia. Cybersecurity is very relatable for anyone who uses phones and computers for social networking, online purchases, or any other purpose that involves personal or sensitive information. It was more engaging because the slides were laid out well and even though it was information rich, the delivery good. No jargon, good speaking pace, clear audio.
6. is the team work evident?
Yes. They clearly collaborated to form the outline and fill it in. The presentation flowed well and was not redundant.
7. is the video appropriate to the audience (either general public or technology professionals)
Both videos were formatted appropriately for their intended audiences. The short form video still touched on the key points and the animated gifs were well placed without being distracting. The longer video had a lot of good information and nothing felt like filler. A technical audience would appreciate this.
USA vs China in the Race for Artificial Intelligence
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uAP4zkGJocQ
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KY9x0RyxVPE
1. is the topic well covered?
Yes. The long form video did a good job of taking different approaches to looking at the state of the AI development race. They covered the topic from an anecdotal, historical, technical, political, and business angle.
The only question I would have is if the political component could be expanded on. As in, China can be better than U.S. at in one area or another but why in particular does being outpaced in AI constitute a national security threat?
2. is the presentation clear?
The presentations were very clear and easy to understand. The pints were easy to follow and made sense.
3. how is the quality of the research?
The research quality was good and they present it in a way that is not overwhelming even though a lot of ground was covered.
4. how is the quality of the video production?
The video production quality was good. Wootark's intro was very well done though it did feel a bit long. Michael's presentation was good in that it was a relaxed approach to some technical topics. As a technical person I appreciated Valentina and Brandon's portions, particularly there use of charts and illustrations. Valentina did a noteworthy job with that. I took note for next time I ever have to prepare a presentation.
The only minor suggestion would be for Brandon to consider purchasing a chair-mounted portable green screen to mask the background. I recently saw them on Amazon and thought they were a great alternative to a big clunky green screens.
5. is the video engaging and interesting?
Yes, not just because the topic is something that both laypeople and academics hear about often, but because of the format. You can tell that each person had creative license over their portion. I found the mix of presentation styles very engaging.
6. is the team work evident?
Yes. They weren't stepping on each other as far as topic coverage and they covered the essential points of the topic.
7. is the video appropriate to the audience (either general public or technology professionals)
The short video was very good but even for a general audience I think that it could have touched on some of the technical point. For example, mention that software and hardware(chips) are a focal point. Possibly, briefly mention that beyond competition, the race is seen as a matter of national security on all sides.
The long video was good in that it covered some of the history of AI along along with technical details on the current state of the art.
Quantum Computing
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0YnhLbABcWQ
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-xedIU8Ir14
1. is the topic well covered?
Very much so. They covered traditional computing, quantum computing and its physics, its applications, its advantages, and what the future may look like.
2. is the presentation clear?
Yes, they presented the topics in well defined sections with good use of visual aids and bullet point format.
3. how is the quality of the research?
It's obvious that they did their research and they did an excellent job with the delivery. The technical details included in the presentation were enough to offer a good high level understanding of quantum computing.
4. how is the quality of the video production?
The video production was good. There was no embedded video or animations but it did not need any. The video resolution was good and the audio was clear.
5. is the video engaging and interesting?
Yes. It is an interesting topic whether you're interested in computer science and physics or someone who is just curious about the future direction of computing.
Though the speaker's presentations were good, there were occasions where the pace and tone made it clear that they were just reading. It's hard to do but my minor suggestion is to try speaking in such a way that it gives the impression that you are speaking extemporaneously. That will help with listener/viewer engagement.
6. is the team work evident?
Yes. They covered a lot of key points but had clearly delineated subtopics. The presentation was smooth and did not seem disjoint.
7. is the video appropriate to the audience (either general public or technology professionals)
Yes, a technical audience would absolutely enjoy the long form video and the way it presents the information. The short form video managed to cover the essential points without going deep enough that it might cause a non-technical viewer to disengage.
No comments:
Post a Comment