Scribd
Upload
84 views2 pages

Review Report

The reviewer provided an evaluation of a research paper titled "Sixth sense technology". While the title and originality were found to be satisfactory, the researcher did not adequately justify the technical components used in the study. The applicability and relationship between the title and conclusion were clearly explained. However, there were issues with plagiarism, spelling errors, and not following proper research pedagogy and formatting standards, particularly in the abstract. The introduction, literature review, and conclusion were evaluated as good but improvements were recommended for the methodology and references sections.

Uploaded by

teddy demissie
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
84 views2 pages

Review Report

The reviewer provided an evaluation of a research paper titled "Sixth sense technology". While the title and originality were found to be satisfactory, the researcher did not adequately justify the technical components used in the study. The applicability and relationship between the title and conclusion were clearly explained. However, there were issues with plagiarism, spelling errors, and not following proper research pedagogy and formatting standards, particularly in the abstract. The introduction, literature review, and conclusion were evaluated as good but improvements were recommended for the methodology and references sections.

Uploaded by

teddy demissie
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2

By: - Gergito Kusse ……………… ID :pramit/1927/10

Review Report: on
Sixth sense technology
1. The title “Sixth sense technology” is good and researchable.
2. Originality:- Through rigorous analysis of related research literature, the contribution of
the researcher is found to be satisfactory with adequate originality in the contemporary
knowledge’s.
3. Technical Merit- The researcher used the different components to implement the study.
The components are Camera, mirror, projector, Microphone, mobile phone and color
marks used in index fingers. But researcher didn’t justify the reason why they uses those
components.
4. Applicability- Researcher has explained the applicability of his research outcome in
general sense like in artificial intelligent.
5. Correlation between title and conclusion- Researcher clearly written the relationship
with title and research outcome.
6. Problem statement and objective- Researcher tried to focus and illustrate many issues
and challenges in the selected domain researches i.e. for example if you went to see time
no need to bay watch, no need to take your phone from pocket to check time instead just
simply draw circle in your hand to see time of the system. Objective of the research is
clearly stated in the document.
7. Research Methods:- Researcher used several methods in experimentation and during the
study of the research. Researcher tried to cover their experiment.
8. Plagiarism- A lot of plagiarized sentences and paragraphs are found in the paper which
required to be paraphrased with appropriate citation and reference. When we check the
abstract part of the document using online plagiarism and found result is 69.4% unique.
9. Presentation English- English of the paper is good. Few improvements like avoidance
of will, we words are required to be done. Several spellings mistakes are there in the
paper draft.
10. Research Pedagogy & Formatting – Formatting of the paper is good. Research
pedagogy has not been followed starting from abstract
11. Citation- Research uses well known standard citation IEEE.
12. General and pedagogical comments on –
• Abstract- Problem /research gape is not stated clearly. Scope and specific goal of
the research with methods are not well written in abstract part
• Introduction- Good
• Review of literature- Good.
• Methodology- Required to be briefly explained in a single paragraph
• Conclusion- Conclusion is good but does not say anything specifically about
socio, techno and economic contribution
• References- good but very small in number

You might also like

pFad - Phonifier reborn

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


Alternative Proxies:

Alternative Proxy

pFad Proxy

pFad v3 Proxy

pFad v4 Proxy