First, please read over the solutions and grading criteria carefully. Then submit a written request to the homework submission box: include your midterm and another piece of paper stapled to the front explaining in detail what problems you would like us to look at, and why you feel like you deserve a regrade on those. Please submit all regrade requests at the same time (i.e., please don't submit a request and 2 days later decide that you actually want another question regraded as well). We reserve the right to look at your entire exam and to adjust your grade to better fit the grading criteria, which might in some cases mean deducting points. We will return the regraded midterms to the homework outbox.
You can talk to the TAs during office hours about the midterm, but regrade requests are only accepted in writing.
This is because the goal configuration was accidentally included as one of the configuration points in the Landmarks section of sphereWorld3.xml file. So two identical goal configurations are put into the World.Landmarks member, but the isPathValid.m function only accepts one of them; so a valid path has a 50% chance of being rejected. sphereWorld3.xml has been updated in pa1.zip, and no other XML files had similar bugs. To manually fix your sphereWorld3.xml without re-downloading the zip file, simply remove this line from the XML:
<Point>5 20<Point>
These refer to the fact that there are 4 landmarks with the same heuristic
value all connected to each other (not necessarily directly, but such that
you can find your way from one to any other one without leaving the
plateau, i.e., without going through any other landmarks with a different
heuristic value).
You can also think of a situation where the robot sees the 4 landmarks
all at the same time, and has the option of choosing any one of them to
explore next . All of these landmarks look equally appealing to the robot
according to the heuristic function, and strictly more appealing than any
other landmark. This would define a "plateau" in the
search space, since the robot can't actually make an informed decision as
to which landmark to explore first.
There is no limit on the number of collaborators you can have on the problem set. The main difference between the problem set and the programming assignment is that you are expected to submit your own individual solution to the problem set , but just one solution per group to the programming assignment. Specifically, you may talk to as many people as you want about the problem set (provided you list all of them), but when you sit down to write up your solution you are not allowed to refer to any written notes from those discussions, and so the writeup that you hand in should represent exclusively your own work.
No, we do not require this. Any milestone should be discussed with your supervising mentor.
Homework not picked up in class will be placed near the submission box.
Please separate the programming assignment and the problem set into two separate submissions.
Homework is always due at 9:30am. If you come to lecture and forget to turn it in at the beginning of class you may give it to us right after lecture. However, in all other cases homework is always due at 9:30am
No, we will only consider the date of the latest submission.
The CS department has a "study buddy" tool for CS courses that you may use to find other students looking for partners. You can access that tool here: http://cs.stanford.edu/degrees/ug/StudyBuddy/ (the SUNet ids of other students looking for partners are shown on the page in a pop-up menu for CS221). You can also communicate with your classmates via the newsgroup: su.class.cs221.
No; attendance at the competition is optional. You do not have to attend the Friday competition. Your code is still due the night before, and the writeup the following day. No late days will be allowed on these submissions.