Draft

ImportantThe draft is an early version of the final product

Review the instructions for the final product before starting work on the draft so you understand what the final product is going to look like.

The purpose of the draft and peer review is to give you an opportunity to get early feedback on your project. Therefore, the draft and peer review will focus primarily on the initial draft of the final product(s). Write the draft of your report in the report.qmd file in your project repo. This should include the components outlined in the final report instructions, but focused on whatever you have developed so far.

You should have a functional product at this stage, but it is okay to have some incompleteness or partial components. If you have made more progress by this point, then you are likely to receive higher quality feedback. You must provide clear instructions in the report on how to access and use your product for the peer reviewers.

Evaluation criteria

Category	Less developed projects	Typical projects	More developed projects
Functional prototype	Product is non-functional or broken. Core LLM features are not implemented or do not work.	Product is reasonably functional with most core LLM features working. May have bugs or incomplete sections, but demonstrates meaningful progress.	Product is functional and performs without major errors. All core LLM components are implemented and working. Still may lack polish and finishing touches.
Progress & completeness	Unclear whether project will be completed by deadline. Major components are missing or only superficially implemented.	Team has made reasonable progress and is on track to finish by deadline. Most major components are in place, though may need refinement.	Team has made substantial progress and is on track to finish ahead of deadline. Most or all major components are complete and working well.
Documentation & accessibility	No clear instructions for accessing or using the product. Setup process is unclear or broken.	Provides adequate instructions for peer reviewers to access and test the product. Basic setup documentation is included.	Clear, comprehensive instructions for accessing and using the product. Well-documented setup process that peer reviewers can easily follow.
Reproducibility	Source code is unclear or poorly organized. Project files are missing or hard to find. Files cannot be rendered or run.	Source code is readable and properly formatted. Project files are generally organized and easy to find. Files render with minimal errors.	All expectations of typical projects + excellent code organization with clear documentation. All required files are provided and well-organized. Project files render cleanly and reproduce outputs successfully.