Scribd
Upload
15 views1 page

CUDA at Scale Independent Project Rubric

The CUDA at Scale Independent Project Rubric outlines evaluation criteria for a code repository, execution artifacts, and project description, with a total of 100 points. The code repository is assessed on completeness, documentation, adherence to coding standards, and support files. Execution artifacts and project descriptions are evaluated based on evidence of code execution and clarity of the project's purpose and challenges faced.

Uploaded by

guptagaurav2503
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
15 views1 page

CUDA at Scale Independent Project Rubric

The CUDA at Scale Independent Project Rubric outlines evaluation criteria for a code repository, execution artifacts, and project description, with a total of 100 points. The code repository is assessed on completeness, documentation, adherence to coding standards, and support files. Execution artifacts and project descriptions are evaluated based on evidence of code execution and clarity of the project's purpose and challenges faced.

Uploaded by

guptagaurav2503
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/ 1

CUDA at Scale Independent Project Rubric

Code Repository (50%)


Given the code repository found at the URL provided, you will be evaluated on the quality of
your code in the following progressive tiers:
No – 0 – No URL given or doesn’t point to a valid code repository
Exists but incomplete - 10
Exists but no README.md with description of how to run it – 20
Code includes README.md and CLI which takes arguments - 30
Well-written code that meets Google C++ Style Guide – 40
Code meets above guidelines and includes support files for compiling and running (Makefile,
run.sh, etc.) - 50

Proof of execution artifacts (25%)


Did you show sufficient evidence that code was executed on either a lot of small pieces of data
(signal input arrays over time) or a few large pieces of data (images/videos)
No – 0
Mostly – 15 - It is clear that the code ran but whether it ran on one or multiple pieces of data in
a single execution of the software is not clear.
Yes – 25

Code Project Description (25%)


Did you provide enough information for the reviewer to understand the purpose of your work,
algorithms/kernels, lessons learned, etc.
No – 0 – No demonstration was presented.
Mostly – 15 – It is clear that the student did the work, but it is not clear if they thought about
the results or were challenged in anyway.
Yes – 25 – The text description was helpful in understanding the students work and showed
that the student did something that was significant (beyond a hello world level effort).

You might also like