1. Project Proposal #7

2. Should this proposal be considered for the Best Proposal prize?  No

3. On a scale of 1 to 10, how would you rate the overall organization/clarity of the proposal?  8

4. On a scale of 1 to 10, how would you rate the overall project idea? 10


*Overall, is the proposal clear, concise, and well-organized?

	For the most part, the proposal was organized very well and was very easy to follow. I would like to have seen the Project Progression before the Evaluation section, but that is
more of a matter of personal opinion. I also felt that the proposal was concise; it did not have too much fluff.
	There are two main improvements I would like to see made to this proposal. First, the paper had many small grammatical errors. Incorrect words were used or capital letters were
used out of places in many instances. This gave the impression that the proposal had not been thoroughly proof-read. Second, the proposal needs a more descriptive title. I would
like to have started reading the proposal with at least some idea as to what it was about.

* Does the proposal meet the posted proposal guidelines?

	This proposal meets the project proposal guidelines. All of the main points required by the guidelines were mentioned, however, I would like to have seen a little more detail on
the target audience of the project. The author clearly related his project to behavior found in advanced primates, but didn’t really discuss how this project might be applied to
future work.

* How does the project idea fit within the framework of Developmental Robotics?

       This project fits nicely into Development Robotics. The author is using a method of repeated random trials to enable the robot to “learn” how to play basic 2D video games.
This is clearly a developmental approach to solving the problem. By forcing the robot to view the screen through a camera rather than shared memory, the author is taking
additional steps to show that the robot is actually learning to play rather than being told what to do. This reinforces the developmental learning process featured in the
experiment.

* Describe what you like BEST about the project idea.

       I really liked the inclusion of the Assumptions and Project Progression sections. Had I not known that the author had been working on this project for some time, I would
have said that the project was too complex to be completed in the remaining time. By including the Project Progression section, the author clearly shows where he is at in the
project and makes it clear that the remaining work should be complete-able in the remaining time. The assumptions section was also a great inclusion. This showed that the author
is intentionally leaving certain aspects of the experiment for future work. By listing the experiment’s assumptions, the author was able to show that he had put a lot of time into
the development of the experiment.

* Describe what you like LEAST about the project idea.

       The number of small grammatical errors made in the proposal really bothered me. I felt like they made the proposal sound thrown together at the last minute. A good
proofreading would have been much appreciated.

* Do you have any concerns about the project?

       I don’t really have any concerns about the project. It sounds like the author has made very good progress towards the completion of the project and has it under control.
However, a timeline for the remaining weeks would have been a good addition.

* Does it seem doable in the remaining time?

       Considering how much work has already been done on the project, I believe the project should be doable in the remaining time.

* Does it seem too difficult?

	The project seems rather daunting to me. However, with how much work has already been completed, I feel like the author is entirely capable of completing the experiment on time.

* Are there any major details left out?

       The only major omissions are that of the timeline and personal experience. While the author did speak on what parts of this project have already been completed, I would
like to have seen what the author has done in the past as background experience. The inclusion of a timeline and the author’s personal experience would have made it easier to
judge if the project is doable in the remaining time.

* Does the idea rely upon technologies that are not currently available?

       The project needs a couple specially developed programs, but these should be fairly easy to develop off of existing open source games. All the technologies the project is
using are readily available.

* Do you have any suggestions for improvement?

       My only suggestion for improvement pertains only to the proposal itself, and that is that next time, the paper should be better proofread before submission.

* Do you have any suggestions for related work that should be cited?

       I felt like the Related Work section and works cited list could’ve been more comprehensive, but no specific papers come to mind.

* Any other comments or suggestions?

       I liked the number of diagrams/figures included in the proposal. I did not feel like there were too many or that any of them were unnecessary.