Definitions for a Naive Reader

Writing these definitions was a new experience for me. I have never had to define the term computational complexity in more detail than what was included in my sentence definition. I found it somewhat challenging to convey the information I wanted to in my expanded definition without having to refer to other terms and concepts that a reader with limited knowledge of algorithm analysis would not be familiar with. In writing these definitions I learned several techniques for explaining a term to a naive user without losing the meaning of the term.

The peer review I received for my work was well written and I found all of the points made by my reviewer to be accurate and helpful. I was somewhat unsure whether or not I had presented my expanded definition clearly enough as this is a term that often confuses computer science students when they first learn about it. I was happy that my reviewer was able to understand my definition and only had a few minor comments on terminology and the ordering of my sections along with a few missed typos.

This exercise reinforced my beliefs that good peer-review can help find errors or problems in a piece of writing that the original author did not notice. I was pleased at the level of detail my reviewer went in to. After implementing the changes suggested I feel that my definitions are stronger than they were originally.

Paul Lee’s peer review of my definitions
My edited definitions

This entry was posted in Reflection Blogs. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *