ISYE 6414

User accounts will be set up and emailed byAugust 23.

Your project deliverables and Peer Reviews will be submitted via this account.

Your individual code will be submitted via your group's GitHub repository, which we'll invite you to after your account is created.

Deliverable 1: Proposal & Exploratory Data Analysis

Overview

Four things, in order of how much they are worth:

Creative exploratory analysis with visuals — the largest single component of the grade.
Your data sources and key variables — where the data came from and what is in it.
Topic motivation — the research question and why it matters.
Prior work — about a page, folded in rather than standalone.

Where the marks are

Exploration and data together carry 26 of 40 points. Prior work carries 4.

A literature review is one of the things generative AI writes most easily, so it demonstrates little. Digging into your actual data does.

Prior work is about one slide: what is already known about your topic and which questions it leaves open. Cite what you drew on, and put the references on a closing slide rather than inline.

Key Dates

Opens: Sep 28, 2026, 12:00 AM US Eastern Time
Due: Oct 25, 2026, 11:59 PM US Eastern Time
Feedback & grades returned by: Nov 8, 2026, 11:59 PM US Eastern Time

Your code is pulled from the repository

There is no separate code submission. Whatever is in your group GitHub repository at the deadline (Oct 25, 2026, 11:59 PM US Eastern Time) is what gets graded, and it should be the analysis behind the presentation you just handed in.

Do not paste code into the deck.

Rubric

How Deliverable 1 is graded, out of 40.

Motivation

Topic Motivation

6 pts

Excelling— A specific, answerable research question with the stakes and the audience made explicit.

4 pts

Proficient— A clear research question; stakes stated but underdeveloped.

2 pts

Developing— Vague or overly broad question; stakes unclear.

0 pts

Emerging— No identifiable research question.

Prior Work (~1 page)

4 pts

Excelling— About a page covering what is already known on the topic and what remains unanswered, with the gap this project addresses made explicit. Sources are relevant and clearly informed the work.

3 pts

Proficient— Current research and open questions both covered, but the gap is only implicit.

1 pts

Developing— Passing reference to prior work with no synthesis, or open questions not addressed.

0 pts

Emerging— No engagement with prior work.

The Data

Data Sources & Key Variables

8 pts

Excelling— Every source documented with provenance and access method; key variables named with types, units and coverage; the join strategy is explained.

6 pts

Proficient— Sources named and key variables listed, but without full detail on provenance or joining.

3 pts

Developing— Sources mentioned; variables not meaningfully described.

0 pts

Emerging— No usable description of the data.

Exploratory Analysis

Creative EDA with Visuals

12 pts

Excelling— Visuals reveal genuine structure in the data. Chart choices are deliberate and suited to the variables, captions carry the takeaway, and the work shows the team has engaged deeply with the data rather than plotted it once.

9 pts

Advanced— Thoughtful plots that surface real patterns, with some interpretation.

6 pts

Proficient— Competent standard plots; limited insight drawn from them.

3 pts

Developing— Perfunctory plots with little or no interpretation.

0 pts

Emerging— No exploratory analysis.

Interpretation & Data Quality

6 pts

Excelling— Distributions, outliers, missingness and relationships between variables are examined and discussed, with clear implications for the modelling to come.

4 pts

Proficient— Data quality is examined, but the implications for modelling are thin.

2 pts

Developing— Superficial treatment of distributions or missingness.

0 pts

Emerging— No examination of data quality.

Communication

Deck Clarity

2 pts

Excelling— Clear arc, one point per slide, visuals placed where they are discussed.

1 pts

Proficient— Generally clear, with some disorganization or crowded slides.

0 pts

Emerging— Hard to follow; visuals disconnected from the text.

Presenter Notes

2 pts

Excelling— Substantive notes in full sentences carrying the reasoning behind the exploration — what was checked, what it showed, what it implies for modelling.

1 pts

Proficient— Notes present but uneven, or mostly restating the slide.

0 pts

Emerging— No presenter notes, or fragments that add nothing.

Penalties

Presenter Notes Missing from Export

−5 pts

0 pts

Notes present— The submitted PDF shows slides with their presenter notes.

-5 pts

Notes absent— Slides only — exported without the notes layout, so the reasoning is not visible to the grader.

Late Submission

−40 pts

0 pts

On time— Submitted by the deadline.

-4 pts

Up to 24 hours late— 10% of the deliverable. The clock starts at the deadline, not at the end of the day.

-10 pts

24 to 48 hours late— 25% of the deliverable.

-40 pts

More than 48 hours late— Not accepted — the deliverable scores zero. Contact the instructor BEFORE the deadline if something has gone wrong; afterwards is too late to help.

Code Not in the Repository

−10 pts

0 pts

Present and complete— The exploration behind the deck is in the group repository at the deadline.

-4 pts

Present but incomplete— Code is there but does not cover the analysis the deck presents, or does not run.

-10 pts

Absent— No code in the group repository at the deadline. We take it directly from there — there is no separate submission and no later upload.

Minimum Slide Count

−4 pts

0 pts

10+ slides— Meets the 10-slide minimum.

-4 pts

Under 10 slides— 10% of the deliverable. Below the minimum, the required sections cannot fit.

Total Possible Points40

Maximum Penalty−59

Deliverable 1: Proposal & Exploratory Data Analysis

Overview

What Goes On Slides

1. The research question

2. Prior work (~1 slide, plus notes)

3. The data

4. Exploratory analysis — the bulk of the deck

5. Where this is going

Format & Submission

Requirements

Rubric