BMS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY & MANAGEMENT

(An Autonomous Institution affiliated to VTU, Belagavi)

Yelahanka, Bengaluru

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING

VII semester Project work Phase I (21CSP76)

and

VIII semester Project work Phase II (21CSP83)

PROJECT WORK DIARY

2021 SCHEME
Academic Year 2024-25

Page 1 of 18
TITLE OF THE PROJECT: WEB SHIELD Using Decision Tree

In House Project / Industry Project: Industry Project

Name of the Industry:

Name of the Guide: Prof. Tanya Chandra

STUDENT DETAILS:

SL. NO. USN NAME OF THE STUDENT EMAIL ID MOBILE NUMBER

1 1BY22CS417 Yogesh S B yogeshbiradar708@gmail.com 8088744966
2 1BY21CS192 Suraj Kumar surajkumar22911@gmail.com 8340596541
3 1BY21CS152 Ritik Roshan roshan22042004@gmail.com 7667973188

Instructions:

1. Each team should have a copy of the project diary.

2. The team must report to their guide every week and update the progress.
3. Each team will maintain a record of their meetings in the Project diary.
4. Each team must publish their work in a reputed conference / journal indexed in Scopus / Web of Science.
5. Project report must be prepared using latex.
6. Every report and research paper should be checked through turnitin Plagiarism tool. (Must be less than 20%)

Page 2 of 18
 Rubrics for Project work Phase I (VII Semester)

Review 1: Literature Survey, Problem Identification, Detailed analysis of the Objectives and Study of existing Methodologies (30 marks)
Review 2: Detailed methodology, Expected deliverables, Presentation skills and Report Evaluation (70 marks)

Total CIE Marks: 100

Marks distribution for Phase I, Review 1 – 30 Marks
(Evaluated jointly by a committee comprising Guide and other designated members)
Parameters Allocated Marks HIGH MEDIUM LOW

Literature Survey & 10 An extensive literature survey A moderate literature survey Inadequate literature survey
Relevance to Present was conducted and collected a was made and collected some was made and not collected
Context good information about the basic information about the basic information about the
existing system. existing system. existing system.
(8-10) (4-7) (0-3)
Problem Identification 10 Detailed and extensive Brief explanation ofthe Problem Identificationis not
& Objectives explanation of thepurpose and purpose and need of the clear.
needof the Project. project. (0-3)
(8-10) (4-7)
Study of existing 5 Detailed study of the existing Moderate study of the existing Little study of the existing
Methodology methodologies was made. methodologies was made. methodologies was made.
(4-5) (2-3) (0-1)

PresentationSkills 5 Contents of the Contents of the Contents of the

presentations presentations are presentations are not
are appropriate appropriate but appropriate
and well delivered. not well delivered. and not welldelivered.
(4-5) (2-3) (0-1)

Page 3 of 18
 Marks distribution for Phase I, Review 2 – 70 Marks
(Evaluated jointly by a committee comprising Guide and other designated members)
Parameters Allocated HIGH MEDIUM LOW
Marks
Extended Literature 10 An extensive extended literature A moderate extended literature Inadequate extended literature
Survey survey was conducted and survey was made and collected survey was made and not
collected a good information some basic information about collected basic information
about the existing system. the existing system. about the existing system.
(8-10) (3-7) (0-2)

Proposed Methodology& 20 Detailed explanation of the Brief explanationof proposed Methodology & outcomes are
Expected Outcomes proposed methodology and methodology andexpected notdefined.
expected outcomes are well outcomes not well defined. (0-5)
defined (6-14)
(15-20)
PresentationSkills 10 Contents of the Contents of the Contents of the
presentations presentations are presentations are not
are appropriate appropriate but appropriate
and well delivered. not well delivered. and not welldelivered.
(8-10) (3-7) (0-2)
Report 20 The report is structured and well The report is not well Report is not well structured and
prepared as per format. structured, but as per format. not as per format (0-5)
(15-20) (6-14)

Page 4 of 18
Ethics 5 Project bibliography was Project bibliography was Project bibliography was
moderate and not properly
complete and flawlessly formatted. incomplete. None of the sources
All sources were cited in the formatted. A few of the sources were cited during the
presentation. were only cited during the presentation.
presentation.
Reports to the guide regularly and Irregular attendance and
consistent in work. Not very regular but consistent inconsistency at work.
(4-5) at the work. (0-1)
(2-3)
Working in a group 5 Collaborates and communicates Exchanges some views but Make little or no attempt to
well in a group situation and requires guidance to collaborate collaborate in a group situation.
integrates the views of others. with others. (0-1)
(4-5) (2-3)

Page 5 of 18
 Rubrics for Project work Phase II (VIII Semester)

Review 1: Methodology, Analysis, Design, presentation Evaluation (30 marks)

Review 2: Implementation, Testing, Results & Report Evaluation (70 Marks)

Total CIE Marks: 100

Marks distribution for Phase II, Review 1 – 30 Marks

(Evaluated jointly by a committee comprising Guide and other designated members)
Allocated
Parameter HIGH MEDIUM LOW
Marks
Methodology (Theoretical 10 Methodology being Methodology being Methodology being
analysis/ Experimental implemented are strongly implemented are implemented are slightly in line
observations/ Fabrication / in line with the moderately in line with the with the objectives defined.
Testing) objectives defined. objectives defined. (0-2)
(8-10) (3-7)

Results and Discussions 10 All the results obtained All the results obtained are Poor presentation of the results.
are well presented and moderately presented and Discussion was not proper.
discussed. (8-10) discussed. (0-2)
(3-7)
Presentation Skills Excellent Presentation Moderate Presentation Poor Presentation
10 (8-10) (3-7) (0-2)

Page 6 of 18
 Marks distribution for Phase II, Review 2 – 70 Marks
(Evaluated jointly by a committee comprising Guide and other designated members)

Allocated
Parameter HIGH MEDIUM LOW
Marks
Methodology (Theoretical analysis/ 10 Implementation Implementation The defined objectives are not
Experimental observations/ methodology of each of methodology of each of the implemented properly. Poor
Fabrication / Testing) the objectives are very objectives are moderately planning was observed.
well defined. Well done. Moderately planned (0-2)
planned methodology. methodology.
(8-10) (3-7)
Results, Discussions and 10 All the results obtained All the results obtained are Poor presentation of the results.
Conclusions are well presented and moderately presented and Discussion was not proper, and
discussed. The discussed. The conclusions conclusions are not valid.
conclusions drawn are drawn are moderately (0-2)
justifiable. justifiable.
(8-10) (3-7)

Presentation Skills and Viva Voce 10 Contents of the Contents of the

Contents of the presentations
presentations are are appropriate but not well
presentations are not
appropriate and well delivered. appropriate and not well
delivered. (3-7) delivered.
(8-10) (0-2)
Report 20 The report is structured The report is not well Report is not well structured and
and well prepared as per structured, but as per format. not as per format
format. (6-14) (0-5)
(15-20)
Ethics 5 Project bibliography was Project bibliography was Project bibliography was
complete and flawlessly moderate and not properly incomplete. None of the sources
formatted. formatted. A few of the were cited during the
All sources were cited in sources were only cited presentation.
the presentation. during the presentation. Irregular attendance and
Page 7 of 18
 Reports to the guide Not very regular but inconsistency at work.
regularly and consistent consistent at the work. (2-3) (0-1)
in work. (4-5)
Working in a group 5 Collaborates and Exchanges some views but Make little or no attempt to
communicates well in a requires guidance to collaborate in a group situation.
group situation and collaborate with others. (0-1)
integrates the views of (2-3)
others.
(4-5)
Research Publications 10 Paper accepted/ Paper submitted in an Not prepared and Not submitted
published in an indexed indexed Journal / paper
Journal / Conferences Conferences (0)
(8-10) (1-7)

Page 8 of 18
 Rubrics for Project work Phase II SEE Evaluation: 100 Marks

Marks distribution for Internal and External Examiners

Parameters Allocated HIGH MEDIUM LOW

Marks
Literature Survey & Relevance to 10 An extensive literature A moderate literature Inadequate literature survey was
Present Context survey was conducted survey was made and made and not collected basic
and collected a good collected some basic information about the existing
information about the information about the system.
existing system. existing system. (0-3)
(8-10) (4-7)
Problem Identification & Objectives 10 Detailed and extensive Brief explanation ofthe Problem Identificationis not
explanation of the purpose and need of the clear.
purpose and needof the project. (0-3)
Project. (4-7)
(8-10)

Methodology (Theoretical analysis/ 15 Implementation Implementation The defined objectives are not
Experimental observations/ methodology of each of methodology of each of the implemented properly. Poor
Fabrication / Testing) the objectives are very objectives are moderately planning was observed.
well defined. Well done. Moderately planned (0-4)
planned methodology. methodology.
(10-15) (5-9)
Results, Discussions and 20 All the results obtained All the results obtained are Poor presentation of the results.
Conclusions are well presented and moderately presented and Discussion was not proper, and
discussed. The discussed. The conclusions conclusions are not valid.
conclusions drawn are drawn are moderately (0-7)
justifiable. justifiable.
(15-20) (8-14)

Page 9 of 18
PresentationSkills and Viva Voce 10 Contents of the Contents of the Contents of the
presentations presentations are presentations are not
are appropriate appropriate but appropriate
and well delivered. not well delivered. and not welldelivered.
(8-10) (4-7) (0-3)

Report 25 Report is structured and Report is not well structured, Report is not well structured and
well prepared as per but asper format not as per format
format (10-19) (0-9)
(20-25)
Research Publications 10 Paper accepted/ Paper submitted in an Not prepared and Not submitted
published in an indexed indexed Journal / paper
Journal / Conferences Conferences (0)
(8-10) (1-7)

Declaration by the Student:

We have read all the Instructions, and the Evaluation rubrics related to Project work Phase I and Project work Phase II. We will be meeting the Guide
every week to update the progress of the project. We will adhere to all the submissions deadlines related to the project work.

Name and signature of the students with the date:

1. Yogesh S B
2. Suraj Kumar
3. Ritik Roshan

Name and Signature of the Project guide with date: Prof. Tanya Chandra

Page 10 of 18
 WEEKLY INTERACTION OF THE STUDENTS WITH THE GUIDE

Date of the Summary of Discussions Signature of

Meeting the Guide

Page 11 of 18
Date of the Summary of Discussions Signature of
Meeting the Guide

Page 12 of 18
 VII Semester: PROJECT WORK PHASE I, REVIEW 1 - EVALUATION SHEET

USN Student Name Literature Survey Problem Identification Study of existing Presentation TOTAL
& Relevance to & Objectives Methodology Skills MARKS
Present Context (10 Marks) (5 Marks) (5 Marks) (30 Marks)
(10 Marks)
1BY22CS417 Yogesh S B

1BY21CS192 Suraj Kumar

1BY21CS152 Ritik Roshan

Remarks by the Committee members

Name and Signature of the committee members with date:

Guide Evaluator 1 Evaluator 2 Evaluator 3

Signature of the HoD with date

Page 13 of 18
 VII Semester: PROJECT WORK PHASE I, REVIEW 2 - EVALUATION SHEET

USN Student Name Extended Proposed Presentation Report Ethics Working in TOTAL
Literature Methodology Skills (20 Marks) (5 Marks) a group MARKS
Survey & Expected (10 Marks) (5 Marks) (70 Marks)
(10 Marks) Outcomes (20
Marks)
1BY22CS417 Yogesh S B

1BY21CS192 Suraj Kumar

1BY21CS152 Ritik Roshan

Remarks by the Committee members

Name and Signature of the committee members with date:

Guide Evaluator 1 Evaluator 2 Evaluator 3

Signature of the HoD with date

Page 14 of 18
 VII Semester: PROJECT WORK PHASE I - CONSOLIDATED CIE MARKS

USN Student Name CIE MARKS (100 Marks) Signature of the Student with date

1BY22CS417 Yogesh S B

1BY21CS192 Suraj Kumar

1BY21CS152 Ritik Roshan

Name and Signature of the committee members with date:

Guide Evaluator 1 Evaluator 2 Evaluator 3 Name and

Signature of the HoD with date

Page 15 of 18
 VIII Semester: PROJECT WORK PHASE II, REVIEW 1 - EVALUATION SHEET

USN Student Name Methodology Results and Discussions PresentationSkills TOTAL MARKS
(10 Marks) (10 Marks) (10 Marks) (30 Marks)

1BY22CS417 Yogesh S B

1BY21CS192 Suraj Kumar

1BY21CS152 Ritik Roshan

Remarks by the Committee members

Name and Signature of the committee members with date:

Guide Evaluator 1 Evaluator 2 Evaluator 3 Name and Signature of the HoD with date

Page 16 of 18
 VIII Semester: PROJECT WORK PHASE II, REVIEW 2 - EVALUATION SHEET

USN Student Name Methodology Results, Presentation Report Ethics Working Research TOTAL
(10 Marks) Discussions Skills and (20 (5 in a group Publications MARKS
and viva voce Marks) Marks) (5 Marks) (10 Marks) (70
Conclusions (10 Marks) Marks)
(10 Marks)
1BY22CS417 Yogesh S B

1BY21CS192 Suraj Kumar

1BY21CS152 Ritik Roshan

Remarks by the Committee members

Name and Signature of the committee members with date:

Guide Evaluator 1 Evaluator 2 Evaluator 3

Signature of the HoD with date

Page 17 of 18
 VII Semester: PROJECT WORK PHASE II - CONSOLIDATED CIE MARKS

USN Student Name CIE MARKS (100 Marks) Signature of the Student with date

1BY22CS417 Yogesh S B

1BY21CS192 Suraj Kumar

1BY21CS152 Ritik Roshan

Name and Signature of the committee members with date:

Guide Evaluator 1 Evaluator 2 Evaluator 3 Name and

Signature of the HoD with date

Page 18 of 18