Showing posts with label artificial intelligence. Show all posts
Showing posts with label artificial intelligence. Show all posts

Tuesday, 13 October 2020

What is artificial intelligence with examples?

UK assignment helper

 

Engineering | School of Computing, Informatics, and Decision Systems Engineering


Course Syllabus - Fall B 2019 

Artificial Intelligence (CSE 571)


Course Description The field of Artificial Intelligence (AI) develops the principles and processes for designing autonomous agents. This course addresses the core concepts in designing autonomous agents that can reason, learn, and act to achieve user-given objectives and prepares students to address emerging technical and ethical challenges using a principled approach to the field. Main topics include principles and algorithms that empower modern applications and future technology development for self-driving vehicles, personal digital assistants, decision support systems, speech recognition and natural language processing, autonomous game playing agents and household robots.


Specific topics covered include: 


● Neural Networks 

● Classical Planning 

● Modeling & Reasoning 

● Reinforcement Learning 

● Markov Decision Processes (MDPs) 

● Partially Observable Markov Decision Processes (POMDPs) 

● Bayesian Networks 

● Sensors for Perception 

● Perception based Recognition 

● Real-world Applications 

● Robotics  


Learning Outcomes

Learners completing this course will be able to: 

● Apply logical reasoning and programming to produce solutions for real-world problems. 

● Use probabilistic inference to navigate uncertain information efficiently. 

● Determine appropriate machine learning methods for a given scenario or dataset. 

● Evaluate the challenges in perception systems for AI. 

● Utilize sensors to execute perception tasks and their applications in intelligent systems. 

● Apply algorithms to train an image classifier. 

● Design an agent that can plan and act to achieve given objectives using noisy sensors and actuators. 


Estimated Workload/ Time Commitment Per Week 

Average of 15-20 hours per week 

Required Prior Knowledge and Skills

● Proficient mathematical skills: Algebra, Linear Algebra, Probability and Statistics 

● Experience using digital drawing tools (e.g. for constructing Parse Trees), Microsoft’s Office 365, installing software 

● Strong Python and ROS skills


Technology Requirements

Hardware 

● Personal computer with 8 GB RAM or higher 

Software and Other 

Reliable WiFi 


Software and Other (programs, platforms, services, etc.) 

● Matlab 

● Ubuntu 16.04 

● ROS Kinetic 

● Turtlebot3 packages 

● PyTorch ● GProlog 1.4.5 

● Cygwin (Windows Users) 

● Linux (Windows users may install virtual machines) 

● Pip and Pgmpy 

● Python 3.4 or higher 

● Microsoft Office 365


Course Content

Instruction 

Video Lectures and In-Video Questions Demonstration Videos Live Events (e.g. Live Sessions hosted by the faculty and Virtual Office Hours hosted by Teaching Assistants) 


Assessments

 In-Video Questions (ungraded, auto-feedback) Knowledge Check Questions (ungraded, auto-feedback) Assignments (graded, auto-graded and course team-graded) Individual Projects (graded, auto-graded) Practice Unit Quizzes (ungraded, auto-feedback) Unit Quizzes (graded, auto-graded) Practice Exams (ungraded, auto-feedback) Final Exam (graded, auto-graded, proctored)

Details of the main instructional and assessment elements this course:


Lecture videos: The concepts you need to know will be presented through a collection of video lectures. You may stream these videos for playback within the browser by clicking on their titles or download the videos. You may also download the slides that are used in the videos. The lecture slides, where available, are provided with the video.

In-Video Questions and Knowledge Checks: Designed to support your learning, in-video questions and knowledge checks are short ungraded quizzes to test your knowledge of the concepts presented in the lecture videos. You may take your time, review your notes, and learn at your own pace because knowledge checks are untimed. You may retake these as often as you would like at any point in the course. You are encouraged to read the feedback, review your answer choices, and compare them to the correct answers. With the feedback as your guide, you may use these as opportunities to study for other assessments and tasks in the course. 

Discussion Forums: Discussion forums are present each week in the course. Although the course team is engaged in these discussions, the forums are spaces to clarify, support, and enrich student-to-student communication and learning.  

Practice Quizzes: To help you prepare for other assessments in the course, you will have practice quizzes prior to taking graded quizzes and the proctored final exam. You may engage with your peers in the discussion forums to address questions, share resources and strategies, and provide feedback to help one another learn. You are encouraged to submit questions in the discussion forum for the course team to address during live events. 

Graded Quizzes: Timed graded quizzes are included at the end of each week to assess you on each week’s content. They typically include 10 multiple choice questions. You will have 30 minutes to complete each quiz. Once you open the quiz, your testing session begins and you must complete it in a single session. You will be allowed one (1) attempt to take and complete each quiz. There is a 15% grade penalty for each day late past the deadline.

Proctored Final Exam: You will have one (1) proctored exam, which is a cumulative final exam (covering content from Weeks 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7). You have 120 minutes to complete the exam. Once you open the exam, your testing session begins and you must complete it in a single session. You will be allowed one (1) attempt to take and complete the exam. Students are allowed a calculator and no more than 6 piece of hard copy, handwritten notes on standard A-4 paper. No late exams will be permitted.

 ProctorU is an online proctoring service that allows students to take exams online while ensuring the integrity of the exam for the institution. Additional information and instructions are provided in the Welcome and Start Here section of the course. You must setup your proctoring 72 hours prior to taking your exams, so complete this early.

Assignments and Projects: This course includes two (2) individual assignments and four (4) projects. Both are provided to students in the first week of the course, so you can review what is expected and design your own learning schedules to complete these on time. At the beginning of specific weeks when they are due, they will be re-introduced and included on your weekly task list at the beginning of each week. Projects and assignments are due at the end of the second week, third week, fifth week, and seventh week of the course. A submission area is provided at the end of these weeks. There are specified late penalties per assignment and project. Please review these carefully:

● Week 2 Assignment: Derivation of Logic Proofs - 10% grade penalty for each day late. 

● Week 3 Assignment: Inference in Bayesian Networks - 10% grade penalty for each day late. 

● Week 3 Project: Bayesian Networks - 15% grade penalty for each day late. 

● Week 5 Project: Neural Network for Collision Prediction - 15% grade penalty for each day late. 

● Week 7 Project: Tools for Sequential Decision-Making33% grade penalty for each day late.  

Course Grade Breakdown

Course Work

Quantity

Percentage of Grade

Individual, Timed Unit Quizzes

8

32%

Individual Assignments

2

6%

Individual Projects

3

32%

Individual, Timed, Proctored Final Exam

1

30%



Grade Scale 

NOTE: You must earn a cumulative grade of 70% to earn a “C” in this course.


A+

97% - 100%

A

90% - 96%

B+

87% - 89%

B

80% - 86%

C+

77% - 79%

C

70% - 76%

D

60% - 69%

E

<60%


Course Schedule

Live Events - Weekly Live Events are a valuable part of the learning experience because students can meet with the course instructor and fellow classmates to learn more about course topics and discuss coursework. The official weekly schedule for these events will be announced once the course starts. If you are able to attend these Live Events, you are strongly encouraged to do so. Live Events hosted by the faculty will be recorded and uploaded to the course.

Virtual Office Hours - Weekly Virtual Office Hours offer a chance for students to get their questions answered from the course instructor and/or teaching assistants. The official weekly schedule for these office hours will be announced once the course starts.Virtual office hours are recorded, but not uploaded into the course. 

 

Week/Module

Begin Date

End Date

Week 1: Introduction to Artificial Intelligence

10/16

10/20

Week 2: Modeling

10/21

10/27

Week 3: Reasoning

10/28

11/3

Week 4: Machine Learning Part 1

11/4

11/10

Week 5: Machine Learning Part 2

11/11

11/17

Week 6: Perception

11/18

11/24

Week 7: Sequential Decision-Making

11/25

12/1

Final Exam

11/29

12/2

Week 8: Course Wrap-Up

12/2

12/6



*Grades are due December 9th, 2019 (Please see the ASU Academic Calendar for additional information.) 

Assignment Deadlines

Unless otherwise noted, all graded work is due on Sundays at 11:59 PM Arizona time for the week it is assigned.

Course Outline with Assignments 

Week 1/Module 1: Introduction to Artificial Intelligence 
Lesson 1: Overview of Artificial Intelligence 
Lesson 2: Probability Basics 
Lesson 3: Knowledge Representation Foundations 
Lesson 4: Machine Learning Essentials
Lesson 5: Sequential Decision-Making Fundamentals

Assignments 
❏ In-Video Questions 
❏ Knowledge Checks 
❏ Practice Quiz 
❏ Graded Quiz

Week 2/Module 2: Modeling 
Lesson 1: Logic Reasoning 

Assignments 
❏ In-Video Questions 
❏ Knowledge Checks 
❏ Practice Quiz 
❏ Graded Quiz 
❏ Graded Assignment (Due by 10/27 at 11:59 PM AZ time)

Week 3/Module 3: Reasoning 
Lesson 1: Reasoning

Assignments 

❏ In-Video Questions 
❏ Knowledge Checks 
❏ Practice Quiz 
❏ Graded Quiz 
❏ Graded Assignment (Due by 11/3 at 11:59 PM AZ time) 
❏ Graded Project (Due by 11/3 at 11:59 PM AZ time) 

Week 4/Module 4: Machine Learning Part 1 
Lesson 1: Introduction to Machine 
Learning Lesson 2: Neural Networks 
Lesson 3: Applications of PyTorch 

Assignments 
❏ In-Video Questions 
❏ Knowledge Checks 
❏ Practice Quiz
❏ Graded Quiz

Week 5/Module 5: Machine Learning Part 2
 Lesson 1: Recurrent Neural Networks 
Lesson 2: Dropout and Uncertainty 
Lesson 3: Introduction to Convolutional Neural Networks 
Lesson 4: Recent Advances in Machine Learning 

Assignments 
❏ In-Video Questions 
❏ Knowledge Checks 
❏ Practice Quiz 
❏ Graded Quiz 
❏ Graded Project (Due by 11/17 at 11:59 PM AZ time) 

Week 6/Module 6: Perception 
Lesson 1: Camera Geometry 
Lesson 2: Multi-View Geometry 
Lesson 3: Feature Representation 
Lesson 4: Machine Recognition 

Assignments 
❏ In-Video Questions 
❏ Knowledge Checks 
❏ Practice Quiz 
❏ Graded Quiz

Week 7/Module 7: Sequential Decision-Making 
Lesson 1: Deterministic Planning 
Lesson 2: Planning Under Uncertainty

Assignments 
❏ In-Video Questions 
❏ Knowledge Checks 
❏ Practice Quiz 
❏ Graded Quiz 
❏ Graded Project (Due by 12/1 at 11:59 PM AZ time)

Final Exam 
Assignments 
❏ Final Exam - Proctored 
      ● Available from 11/29 at 12:01 AM - 12/2 11:59 PM AZ time

Week 8/Module 8: Course Wrap-Up 
Lesson 1: Recap of Critical Concepts in Artificial Intelligence 
Lesson 2: Recent Trends and Future Work 
Lesson 3: Exciting Applications of Artificial Intelligence

Assignments 
❏ Practice Quiz 
❏ Graded Quiz 
❏ Optional: Portfolio Inclusion Report for ASU MCS Degree 
❏ Course Survey 

Policies 
Please note that the course syllabus is subject to change without advance notice at the discretion of the faculty. 

All ASU and Coursera policies will be enforced during this course. For policy details, please consult the MCS Graduate Handbook 2018 - 2019 and/or the MCS Onboarding Course.

Academic Integrity

Students in this class must adhere to ASU’s academic integrity policy, which can be found at https://provost.asu.edu/academic-integrity/policy). Students are responsible for reviewing this policy and understanding each of the areas in which academic dishonesty can occur. In addition, all engineering students are expected to adhere to both the ASU Academic Integrity Honor Code and the Fulton Schools of Engineering Honor Code. All academic integrity violations will be reported to the Fulton Schools of Engineering Academic Integrity Office (AIO). The AIO maintains records of all violations and has access to academic integrity violations committed in all other ASU college/schools.  

Course Faculty 
Drs. Heni Ben Amor, Siddharth Srivastava, Yezhou Yang, and Yu “Tony” Zhang collaborated in the design of this course. 



Dr. Heni Ben Amor 

Heni Ben Amor, Ph.D. is an Assistant Professor at Arizona State University (ASU) where he leads the ASU Interactive Robotics Laboratory. He studied Computer Science at the University of Koblenz-Landau (GER) and earned a Ph.D in robotics from the Technical University Freiberg and the University of Osaka in 2010 where he worked with Hiroshi Ishiguro and Minoru Asada. He received the NSF CAREER Award as well as the Outstanding Assistant Professor Award in 2018. Prior to that, he was a Research Scientist at the Institute for Robotics and Intelligent Machines at GeorgiaTech in Atlanta. Heni's research topics focus on artificial intelligence, machine learning, human-robot interaction, robot vision, and automatic motor skill acquisition. He received the highly competitive Daimler-and-Benz Fellowship as well as several “Best Paper” awards at major robotics and AI conferences. He is also on the program committee of various AI and robotics conferences such as RSS, AAAI, IJCAI, IROS, and ICRA



 Dr. Yezhou Yang 

Yezhou Yang, Ph.D. is an Assistant Professor at the School of Computing, Informatics, and Decision Systems Engineering (CIDSE), Arizona State University (ASU), directing the Active Perception Group (APG). He received his M.S. and Ph.D. degrees in Computer Science from the University of Maryland at College Park in 2013 and 2015 respectively. Prior to that, he obtained a B.Eng. degree in Computer Science and Engineering from Zhejiang University,

China. His primary research focus is in Computer Vision and Robot Vision, especially exploring visual primitives in interpreting peoples’ actions and the scene’s geometry from visual input, grounding them by natural language as well as high-level reasoning over the primitives for intelligent systems. His research mainly focuses on solutions to visual learning, which significantly reduces the time to program intelligent agents. He is a recipient of Qualcomm Innovation Fellowship 2011, Verisk AI faculty award, and the NSF CAREER award in 2018.



Dr. Siddharth Srivastava 


Siddharth Srivastava, Ph.D. is an Assistant Professor of Computer Science in the School of Computing, Informatics, and Decision Systems Engineering (CIDSE) at Arizona State University (ASU). Prof. Srivastava was a Staff Scientist at the United Technologies Research Center in Berkeley. Prior to that, he was a postdoctoral researcher in the RUGS group at the University of California Berkeley. He received his Ph.D. in Computer Science from the University of Massachusetts Amherst. His research interests include robotics and AI, with a focus on reasoning, planning, and acting under uncertainty. His work on integrated task and motion planning for household robotics has received coverage from international news media. His dissertation work received a “Best Paper” award at the International Conference on Automated Planning and Scheduling (ICAPS) and an Outstanding Dissertation award from the Department of Computer Science at UMass Amherst.


Dr. Yu “Tony” Zhang


Yu (“Tony”) Zhang, Ph.D. is an Assistant Professor at Arizona State University (ASU), where he directs the Cooperative Robotic Systems (CRS) laboratory. He graduated with a Ph.D. degree in Computer Science from the University of Tennessee, Knoxville in 2012. His research interests include the intersection of artificial intelligence (AI) and robotics. The focuses are innovating and applying AI and machine learning methods to human-robot teaming, multi-agent systems, distributed robotic systems, and more generally, human-in-the-loop AI systems. His research has been funded by federal governments and agencies, such as the National Science Foundation (NSF), National Aeronautics and Space Foundation (NASA) and Air Force of Scientific Research(AFOSR). Zhang has been highlighted with “Best Paper” Awards in premier robotics conferences. He is also a member/senior member of the program committees of major AI and robotics conferences, such as AAAI, IJCAI, IROS, and ICRA.  


Wednesday, 16 September 2020

IT 8100 DATABASE ARCHITECTURE AND DESIGN

UK assignment helper





 IT 8100 DATABASE ARCHITECTURE

AND DESIGN


Group Activity

3

“Student Information

System”

ERD Conceptual Model and

Structured Query Language (SQL)


Group Activity

3 “Student Information System”

3

ERD Conceptual Model

1.

Create the Entity Relationship

Diagram ERD)

Create the Entity Relationship

Diagram ERD) for the following

tables:

Student

Course

Offering

Faculty

Enrollment




2. Convert the Entity ER

Diagram to Relational

Schemas

Convert the Entity ER

Diagram to Relational

Schemas.

Create the appropriate

Relationships, Cardinality

1 1, 1 N, N 1, M N ), and

Key Fields


Use these attributes for your tables:

Student

stdSSN

stdFirstName

stdLastName

stdCity

stdState

stdZip

stdMajor

stdClass

stdGPA

Course

CourseNo

crsDesc

CrsUnits

O ffering

OfferNo

CourseNo

OffTerm

OffYear

OffLocation

OffTime

FacSSN

OffDays

Faculty

FacSSN

FacFirstName

FacLastName

FacCity

FacState

FacZipCode

FacRank

FacHireDate

FacSalary

FacSupervisor

FacDept

Enrollment

OfferNo

StdSSN

EnrGrade


3

. Write the Structured Query

Language (SQL ) for the Relational

Schemas

Write the Structured Query

Language (SQL) for

the Relational Schemas

Declare the appropriate

column names, data types,

lengths and constraints


4. Write Structured

Query

Language (SQL ) Commands

Write and enter the SQL commands to add records into your

Student Information System tables (at least 5 records in each table).

Write the SQL commands to produce four different reports,

Including joins between tables.

Queries using l ogical, arithmetic, and comparison operators.

Sort the reports by different tables.

Tuesday, 15 September 2020

DATABASE ARCHITECTURE AND DESIGN

UK assignment helper


 




IT 8100 DATABASE ARCHITECTURE AND DESIGN


“Contract-Supplier System”

ERD Conceptual Model

Group Activity 2 “Contract-Supplier System”

3

• A company negotiates contracts with suppliers to provide certain amount of items at a fixed price

 • Orders are placed against any of the already  negotiated contracts 

• A contract could provide items to any number of  orders.

 • An order may include any number of items negotiated in the contract

 • Orders should not exceed the maximum amount of items quoted in the contract 

• All items in an order must be provided as part of a single contract and a single project ERD Conceptual Model

Group Activity 2 “Contract-Supplier System”


Create the Entity Relationship Diagram (ERD) Conceptual Design 

Final Project Guidelines and Rubric

UK assignment helper

 






IT 412: Final Project Guidelines and Rubric 

Overview There are two components to the final project for this course. The first component is a risk analysis paper. The second component is a risk mitigation plan presentation to stakeholders that illustrates an organization’s regulatory position related to a given scenario. This project is divided into two milestones, which will be submitted at various points throughout the course to scaffold learning and ensure quality final submissions. These milestones will be submitted in Modules Three and Five. The final product will be submitted in Module Seven. 

 

In this assignment, you will demonstrate your mastery of the following course outcomes: 

 

 Evaluate federal, regional, and state cyberlaws and ethics regulations for their impact on organizations’ IT and computing policies and operations  Assess personal and professional ethical violations for the extent to which they impact IT and computing within organizations  Recommend policies and strategies that align with cyberlaw and ethics guidelines for facilitating compliance and addressing non-adherence  Utilize cyberlaw and ethics guidelines in creating IT-specific codes of ethics for mitigating stakeholder and organizational risk 

 

Scenario ABC Healthcare is a startup company with 50 employees. The company’s computer network is shown in Figure 1 below. The healthcare data server contains the company's records, including copies of patient health records with personally identifiable data, patient billing, company financials, and forms. 

 

You have been hired as the IT network security officer, reporting directly to the chief information officer (CIO). Currently, there is a network administrator who has very limited experience and worked as a desktop technician prior to joining ABC. This network administrator helped set up the existing network. In addition, ABC plans to hire a desktop technician and a website developer/programmer who will report directly to the CIO. 

 

There are no policies or guidelines for employees’ usage of the computers and network. Network setup was done by various vendors, and all of the programs use default usernames and passwords. Wireless access has been set up for staff using wireless laptops. The same wireless access point also provides clients access to the internet. Some staff members bring in their own computers and connect them to the network. Employees use the work systems for personal web browsing and to check personal email accounts. 

 

As part of network security, management set up a video monitoring system throughout the office. Employees are not notified of any monitoring. 

There is a copier/printer in the front office that is used by employees. Currently, all unused copies are left next to the copier for recycling. 


 

 

 

 

Figure 1 

 

The administration office room uses an open cubicle structure for its staff. Figure 2 depicts the cubicles and seating of its sta f. Staff members sometimes complain that they can hear each other during the work day. 


 

 

 

Figure 2 

 

 

Prompt Create a comprehensive risk analysis narrative in which you assess ABC Healthcare’s information systems for ethics violations and cyberlaw compliance, and research the framework for creating an acceptable use-of-technology policy and code of ethics. 

 

Next, using PowerPoint, Google Presentation, or Prezi, create a presentation in which you recommend appropriate strategies for remediating the instances of ethics violations and cyberlaw noncompliance you identified in your risk analysis. Propose an organizational code of ethics related to information technology that prevents future violations and noncompliance, and propose an acceptable use-of-technology policy that addresses non-adherence. 


 

 

Specifically, the following critical elements must be addressed: 

 

I. Risk Analysis Paper 1. Describe the information technology structure of the organization in the given scenario. 2. Identify specific cyberlaws and ethics regulations that pertain to the organization and its computing operations in the scenario. 3. Organizational ethics violations i. Classify unethical behaviors with respect to whether they are personal or professional in nature, being sure to support your position with specific examples. ii. Assess the impact of the unethical behaviors on IT and computing within the organization. 4. Cyberlaw noncompliance i. Identify instances of cyberlaw noncompliance, being sure to cite the specific regulation(s) being violated. ii. Assess the impact of the noncompliance on IT and computing within the organization. 5. Acceptable use-of-technology policies research i. Compare and contrast acceptable use-of-technology policies from various organizations. You can find suggested organizations below or use policies of your own choosing. ii. Select aspects of the acceptable use-of-technology policies you have researched that you feel could be adapted to meet the needs of the organization, and explain how you would adapt them. 6. Codes of ethics research i. Compare and contrast IT-specific codes of ethics from various organizations. You can find suggested organizations below or use codes of ethics of your own choosing. ii. Select aspects of the codes of ethics you have researched that you feel could be adapted to meet the needs of the organization, and explain how you would adapt them. 

 

IT Acceptable Use Policies 

 

There are many areas within the field of IT, and each area’s policies may vary based on specialization. IT does not have one rule-making body as other professions do. IT does, however, have many professional organizations that represent different specializations, such as security, operations management, and computing technology. 

 

SANS Institute Acceptable Use Policy ISSA Acceptable Use Policy Pennsylvania College of Technology IT Acceptable Use Policy AT&T Acceptable Use Policy 


 

 

IT Codes of Ethics 

 

Professional organizations provide codes of ethics that may vary slightly, depending on specialization. A code of ethics may also be provided by a business or educational organization. 

 

SANS Institute IT Code of Ethics ISSA Code of Ethics  K-State Information Technology Employee Code of Ethics 

 

Business Codes of Ethics 

 

AT&T Code of Ethics Microsoft Standards of Business Conduct 

 

 

II. Risk Mitigation Plan Presentation: Based on your research, you will create a multimedia presentation (suggested length of 5–10 slides) using a tool of your choice (for example, PowerPoint, Google Presentation, or Prezi). Your audience for this presentation is the organization’s management. This presentation will provide a brief overview of the issues you identified in your risk analysis and present your recommendations for addressing the problems identified in your analysis. The presentation must include the following elements: 

 

o Provide an overview of the issues you identified in your risk analysis. In other words, what were the unethical behaviors and instances of cyberlaw noncompliance? o Propose appropriate strategies that remediate the identified ethics violations and cyberlaw noncompliance. What can the organization do now to address the issues you have identified? o Recommend, based on your research, a brief list of appropriate policy statements that address acceptable use in facilitating future compliance and addressing non-adherence. In other words, how can the organization prevent the same or similar problem(s) in the future? o Recommend, based on your research, a brief IT-specific code of ethics that mitigates the risk of future instances of violation and noncompliance. In other words, how can the organization prevent the same or similar problem(s) in the future? 

 

Guidelines for Presentation: Your final presentation can be submitted in PowerPoint, Google Presentation, or Prezi format. 

 

 You can find various template designs on the internet for your presentation. Prior to selecting a specific style, consider your presentation from the perspective of your audience. Avoid distractions. Be consistent with the style of text, bullets, and sub-points to support a powerful presentation that allows your content to be the focus. 


 

 

 Each slide should include your key point(s). Do not place large blocks of text on the visuals. Add more extensive information in the presenter notes section.  Use clip art, AutoShapes, pictures, charts, tables, and diagrams to enhance, but not overwhelm, your content.  Be mindful of your intended audience. 

 

Below are links that offer helpful tips and examples for developing your presentation: 

 

 Making PowerPoint Slides  Beyond Bullet Points: The Better Way to Use PowerPoint  Really Bad PowerPoint and How to Avoid It 

 

 

 

Milestone One: Draft of Risk Analysis Paper, Sections 1–3 

Milestones 

In Module Three, you will submit a draft of Section 1: Information Technology Structure, Section 2: Cyberlaws and Ethic Regulations, and Section 3: Ethics Violations. This milestone will be graded using the Milestone One Rubric. 

 

Milestone Two: Draft of Risk Analysis Paper, Sections 4–5 In Module Five, you will submit a draft of Section 4: Cyberlaw Noncompliance and Section 5: Acceptable Use Policies of the risk analysis paper. This milestone will be graded using the Milestone Two Rubric. 

 

Final Submission: Risk Analysis Paper and Risk Mitigation Plan Presentation In Module Seven, you will submit the final risk analysis paper and the risk mitigation plan presentation. These should be complete, polished artifacts containing  all of the critical elements of the final product. They should reflect the incorporation of feedback gained throughout the course. This submission will be graded using the Final Project Rubric. 


 

 

Final Project Rubric Guidelines for Submission: Written components of this project must follow these formatting guidelines: double spacing, 12-point Times New Roman font, one- inch margins, and discipline-appropriate citations. The risk analysis paper should be 10–15 pages in length, and the risk mitigation presentation should have 5–10 slides. 

 

 

Critical Elements Exemplary (100%) Proficient (85%) Needs Improvement (55%) Not Evident (0%) Value Paper: Information Technology Structure Meets “Proficient” criteria and uses industry-specific language to establish expertise Comprehensively describes the information technology structure of the organization in the scenario Describes the information technology structure of the organization in the scenario, but description is inaccurate or lacks detail Does not describe the information technology structure of the organization in the scenario 5 Paper: Cyberlaws and Ethics Regulations Meets “Proficient” criteria and provides specific examples from similar organizations encountered during research Identifies specific cyberlaws and ethics regulations that pertain to the organization and its computing operations Identifies specific cyberlaws and ethics regulations but does not connect them to the organization and its computing operations Does not identify specific cyberlaws and ethics regulations 7 Paper: Ethics Violations: Personal or Professional Meets “Proficient” criteria, and examination includes harm caused by unethical behaviors Accurately classifies unethical behaviors as personal or professional in nature and supports position with specific examples Classifies unethical behaviors inaccurately, or does not support position with specific examples Does not classify unethical behaviors as personal or professional in nature 7 Paper: Ethics Violations: Impact Meets “Proficient” criteria and expands on the impact beyond immediate internal stakeholders Assesses the impact of unethical behaviors on IT and computing within the organization Assesses the impact of unethical behaviors but does not connect them to the organization, or discussion lacks detail Does not assess the impact of unethical behaviors on IT and computing within the organization 7 Paper: Cyberlaw Noncompliance: Regulation(s) Meets “Proficient” criteria, and examination includes harm caused by noncompliance Accurately identifies instances of cyberlaw noncompliance and cites specific regulation(s) being violated Identifies instances of cyberlaw noncompliance inaccurately, or does not cite specific regulation(s) being violated Does not identify instances of cyberlaw noncompliance 7 

Paper: Cyberlaw Noncompliance: Impact 

Meets “Proficient” criteria and expands on the impact beyond immediate internal stakeholders 

Assesses the impact of cyberlaw noncompliance on IT and computing within the organization 

Assesses the impact of cyberlaw noncompliance but does not connect it to the organization, or discussion lacks detail 

Does not assess the impact of cyberlaw noncompliance on IT and computing within the organization 


 

 

Paper: Acceptable Use Policies: Comparing and Contrasting 

Meets “Proficient” criteria, and examples are drawn from a broad range of resources 

Comprehensively compares and contrasts acceptable use-of- technology policies 

Compares and contrasts acceptable use-of-technology policies, but discussion lacks detail or is inaccurate 

Does not compare and contrast acceptable use-of-technology policies 

Paper: Acceptable Use Policies: Adaptation 

Meets “Proficient” criteria and provides detailed examples of how the adaptation will support the organization 

Selects aspects of the policies that could be adapted to meet the needs of the organization and explains how they would be adapted 

Selects aspects of the policies that could be adapted to meet the needs of the organization, but does not explain how they would be adapted 

Does not select aspects of the policies that could be adapted to meet the needs of the organization 

Paper: Codes of Ethics: Comparing and Contrasting 

Meets “Proficient” criteria, and examples are drawn from a broad range of resources 

Comprehensively compares and contrasts IT-specific codes of ethics 

Compares and contrasts codes of ethics, but codes are not IT- specific, or discussion lacks detail or is inaccurate 

Does not compare and contrast IT-specific codes of ethics 

Paper: Codes of Ethics: Adaptation 

Meets “Proficient” criteria and provides detailed examples of how the adaptations will support the organization 

Selects aspects of codes of ethics that could be adapted to meet the needs of the organization and explains how they could be adapted 

Selects aspects of codes of ethics that could be adapted to meet the needs of the organization, but does not explain how they would be adapted, or explanation is not accurate 

Does not select aspects of the codes of ethics that could be adapted to meet the needs of the organization 

Presentation: Overview 

Meets “Proficient” criteria and uses industry-specific language to establish expertise 

Provides a comprehensive overview of the issues identified in the risk analysis 

Provides an overview of the issues identified in the risk analysis, but the overview lacks detail 

Does not provide an overview of the issues identified in the risk analysis 

Presentation: Strategies 

Meets “Proficient” criteria and provides detailed examples of how the proposed strategies will remediate the identified issues 

Proposes appropriate strategies that remediate the identified ethics violations and cyberlaw noncompliance 

Proposes strategies that remediate the identified ethics violations or cyberlaw noncompliance, but not both, or the proposed strategies are inappropriate 

Does not propose appropriate strategies that remediate the identified ethics violations and cyberlaw noncompliance 

Presentation: Policy Statements 

Meets “Proficient” criteria and provides detailed examples of how the proposed policy statements will facilitate noncompliance and address non- adherence 

Recommends appropriate policy statements that address acceptable use in facilitating compliance and addressing non- adherence 

Recommends policy statements that address acceptable use in facilitating compliance or addressing non-adherence, but not both, or recommended policy statements are inappropriate 

Does not recommend policy statements that address acceptable use in facilitating compliance and addressing non- adherence 


 

 

Presentation: Code of Ethics 

Meets “Proficient” criteria and provides detailed examples of how the proposed code of ethics will mitigate the risk from the identified issues 

Recommends appropriate code of ethics that mitigates the risk of future instances of violation and noncompliance 

Recommends code of ethics that mitigates risk of future instances of violation or noncompliance, but not both, or the recommended code of ethics is inappropriate 

Does not recommend code of ethics that mitigates risk of future instances of violation and noncompliance 

Articulation of Response 

Submission is free of errors related to citations, grammar, spelling, syntax, and organization and is presented in a professional and easy-to-read format 

Submission has no major errors related to citations, grammar, spelling, syntax, or organization 

Submission has major errors related to citations, grammar, spelling, syntax, or organization that negatively impact readability and articulation of main ideas 

Submission has critical errors related to citations, grammar, spelling, syntax, or organization that prevent understanding of ideas 

Earned Total 100% 

 

Monday, 14 September 2020

Short Paper Guidelines and Rubric

UK assignment helper





 IT 415 Short Paper Guidelines and Rubric

Short papers offer additional opportunities for analysis of the system design process. In the first short paper, you will discuss a sample system design

document, and in the second short paper, you will summarize each document that will be included in your detailed design.

You are required to write two short papers.

Guidelines for Submission: Submit assignment as a Word document with double spacing, 12-point Times New Roman font, and one-inch margins.

Critical Elements Exemplary (100%) Proficient (85%) Needs Improvement (55%) Not Evident (0%) Value

Content Demonstrates strong or Demonstrates knowledge with Demonstrates knowledge but Fails to demonstrate knowledge 20

adequate knowledge of the some errors or omissions with major errors or omissions of the materials

materials

Critical Analysis Provides a strong critical analysis Provides analysis and Provides analysis and Fails to provide critical analysis 20

and interpretation of the design interpretation of design interpretation of design and interpretation of the design

document document with some errors or document but with major errors document

omissions or omissions

Sources/Examples Sources or examples meet Sources or examples meet Sources or examples meet Source or example selection and 20

required criteria and are well required criteria but are less required criteria but are poorly integration of knowledge from

chosen to provide substance than adequately chosen to chosen to provide substance the course is clearly deficient

and perspectives on the issue provide substance and and perspectives on the issue

under examination perspectives on the issue under under examination

examination

Writing (Mechanics) Paper is clearly organized, well Paper is fairly well organized and Paper is poorly organized with Paper is not organized or well 20

written, and in proper format written, and is in proper format inconsistent and inadequate written; work is of poor quality

with strong sentence and with reasonably good sentence sentence and paragraph and unacceptable in terms of

paragraph structure and few and paragraph structure, but development, and numerous grammar and spelling

errors in grammar and spelling significant number of errors in errors in grammar and spelling

grammar and spelling

Writing (APA) Paper contains proper APA Paper contains few errors in APA Paper contains significant errors Paper contains more than five 20

formatting with no more than formatting in APA formatting significant errors in APA

one significant error formatting

Earned Total 100%

Thursday, 10 September 2020

Case Study Analysis Guidelines and Rubric

UK assignment helper

  




IT 380 Module Three Case Study Analysis Guidelines and Rubric

Overview: This case study analysis will help you analyze a cybersecurity scenario and identify which principles were violated. Each skill in this paper is an essential part of the final project and accompanying milestones in this course.

Prompt: Use the articles from the Module Three required resources to analyze the cyber security occurrence, determine which principles were violated, and recommend appropriate policies to prevent recurrence.

Scenario: In February 2015, as many as 80 million customers of the nation’s second‐largest health insurance company, Anthem Inc., had their account information stolen. This compromise affected customers in at least 14 different states where Anthem provided services.

The hackers gained access to Anthem’s computer system and got information including names, birthdays, medical IDs, Social Security numbers, street addresses, email addresses, and employment information including income data. Both current and former customers were exposed during this breach.

So, while this was an attack against a medical provider and it resulted in a massive data breach, regulatory requirements were not sufficient to help prevent this breach. Because no actual medical information appears to have been stolen, the breach would not come under Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) rules, which govern the confidentiality and security of medical information.

Based on the Test Out sections from this module and the additional module resources you have reviewed, your paper should address the following critical elements:

 Identification of cyber security principles that were violated and rationale of cause

 Analysis of cryptography that would have helped prevent this breach

 Recommendation of additional policies that would have been useful to mitigate the breach or even prevent the breach


Rubric

Guidelines for Submission: Your paper should be submitted as a 2‐ to 3‐page (in addition to the cover and reference pages) Microsoft Word document with double spacing, 12‐point Times New Roman font, and one‐inch margins. All sources must be cited in APA format.

Critical Elements

Exemplary (100%)

Proficient (90%)

Needs Improvement (70%)

Not Evident (0%)

Value

Identification of Cybersecurity Principles That Were Violated

Meets “Proficient” criteria and correctly identifies which principles were violated with empirical supporting examples

Correctly identifies which principles were violated with supporting examples

Identifies which principles were violated but supporting examples have gaps

Does not identify a single principle

30

Analysis of Cryptography and Prevention

Meets “Proficient” criteria and analysis demonstrates keen insight of cryptography and prevention methods

Analysis demonstrates accurate knowledge of cryptography and prevention methods

Analysis demonstrates knowledge of cryptography but needs additional information to support prevention ideas

Does not analyze the cryptography and prevention methods

30

Policy Recommendation

Meets “Proficient” criteria and recommendation demonstrates understanding of policies that would remedy the situation appropriately

Recommends policies to ensure proper resolution of scenario

Recommends a single policy to remedy situation but recommendation has gaps in strategic implementation

Does not recommend any policies

30

Proper Use of Writing, Mechanics, and Grammar

Paper is free of errors in organization and grammar with applicable sources cited

Paper is mostly free of errors of organization and grammar; errors are marginal and rarely interrupt the flow; cites applicable sources

Paper contains errors of organization and grammar but errors are limited enough so that assignments can be understood; cites applicable sources

Paper contains errors of organization and grammar making the content difficult to understand

10

Total

100%

Wednesday, 9 September 2020

Ethical Case Study

UK assignment helper

 





Ethical Case Study Project Guidelines

Overview

You write a case study based on your own experience related to an ethical issue within an organization; or you may choose to write about an emerging ethical issue within your current or planned industry. The case study can be fully anonymous to protect those within your organization, and you may choose to identify your role in the case study or not. Your case study will be submitted for a grade in parts throughout the term with the entire final document as the last deliverable. Please review these general tips and guidelines. How to approach writing your case:

• Assume you are one of the leaders in the organization. Write with clarity and confidence on the topic based on what you have learned prior to and during this course.

• Pretend that the audience reading this case study knows nothing about the situation or ethical philosophy, decision-making, etc. Provide enough detail to give readers enough information to draw conclusions, but remain succinct.

• Explain, as needed, the context, evaluate the evidence, and make a decision concerning the appropriate course of action, and support your conclusion through arguments and counter-arguments.

• Take a clear and decisive position – What would you do in this case? What ethical decision-making framework did you use? What most influenced your decision?

Formatting Requirements

The formatting of this document should be as follows:

• Use consistent formatting throughout (12 pt font, Times New Roman, single-spaced).

• Do review your paper thoroughly for grammatical issues and typographical errors!

• Use cover page and references

• Cite your sources (do not use Wikipedia or Blog, etc.) and list them in a reference page per APA style.

• At minimum 5 resources that are published no more than five years ago. Choose scholarly resources (i.e., peer-reviewed journal, sources from your industry/organization, and (sparingly) the textbook.

• 9-12 body pages (single-spaced, not including cover page and references).

Project Timeline

• Week 3: Choose an ethical issue and a topic. See the assignment for details.

• Week 4: Part 1 and Outline of Case

• Week 5: Part 2

• Week 6: Part 3

• Week 7: Final Document

• Week 8: Final Presentation

Ethical Case Outline

Part 1: Describe the case (3-4 pages):

• Identify the parties involved, their rights, their responsibilities

• Identify the salient ethical and/or legal issues of the case

• Identify the relevant factual issues, conceptual issues, social constraints, and any additional information necessary for an accurate understanding of the case.

• If needed, conduct research about the issue from multiple perspectives and include relevant ethical theory, legal requirements, and technical details about the case to ensure that the case can be solved.

• See OWL Sample Outlines for formatting information.

Part 2: Critically analyze the case (3-4 pages):

• Identify the primary “ethical dilemma (or question)” in the case.

• Formulate possible courses of action.

• Discuss any role that information technology or context played in creating the special circumstances of the case.

• Evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of those actions.

• Analyze different courses of action, are they based on a consequential or non-consequential approach? Are these courses of action ethical?

• Weigh the pros and cons of each action.

Part 3: Solve the case (3-4 pages):

• Indicate which course of action you would choose, and why. If you were personally involved in the scenario, you can detail what you DID do compared to what you WOULD do given what you have learned in this course.

• Provide your own opinions: do not rephrase the opinions of others, create your own, unique viewpoint based on your ethical philosophy, ethical decision-making framework, and the context and scenario of the case.

• Clearly demonstrate and explain how the pros of your solution outweigh the cons.

• Use the facts of the case and supporting resources to convince your readers of the soundness of your ethical point of view

Final Document

• All parts due as one cohesive document.

• Be sure to have addressed any issues or concerns that were brought to your attention from each individual part.

Final Presentation

• Create a 8-10 minute narrated presentation that is limited to 10 slides

Tuesday, 8 September 2020

Computer network design, implementation and testing.

UK assignment helper

 





 

Southampton Solent University

Coursework Assessment Brief

Assessment Details

 

Unit Title:

Networks

Unit Code:

COM712

Unit Leader:

Warren Earle

Level:

7

Assessment Title:

Report referral

Assessment Number:

AE3

Assessment Type:

Report

Restrictions on Time/Word Count:

3000

Consequence of not meeting time/word count limit:

 

There is no penalty for submitting below the word/count limit, but students should be aware that there is a risk they may not maximise their potential mark.

 

Assignments should be presented appropriately in line with the restrictions stated above; if an assignment exceeds the time/word count this will be taken in account in the marks given using the assessment criteria shown.

 

Individual/Group:

Individual

Assessment Weighting:

50%

Issue Date:

July 6th 2020

Hand In Date:

4th September 2020

Planned Feedback Date:

4th September 2020

Mode of Submission:

on-line

Number of copies to be submitted:

Where on-line submission via ‘Solent Online Learning’ is used, students are not required to submit a hard copy.

Anonymous Marking

 

This assessment:

Will be marked anonymously

 

Assessment Task

The assessment task is to rework a report on a computer network design, implementation and testing.

Please see enclosed details

Networking Report – please read very carefully

 

         

XYZ are a company in the South of England. They have an office in Southampton with staff in three departments, Sales, Marketing and Admin. A new network is proposed. Each department will have its own router. The router in the Admin department will have a connection to an Internet Service Provider router to provide Internet connectivity for all departments. The business network must use an interior gateway routing protocol.

 

 


The tasks are as follows:

1)           Design an IPv4 and IPv6 addressing scheme for the network (including the interfaces on the ISP routers connected to the company office).

Use 192.168.0.0/24 network address subnetted into three networks for Sales, Marketing and Admin each with 62 possible usable addresses.

Use 198.51.100.0/30 as the network address for the ISP

Use the following IPv6 network addresses do not subnet them.

2001:db8:cafe:1::/64

2001:db8:cafe:2::/64

2001:db8:cafe:3::/64

  Design, implement and test a network with routers and switches and essential additional services including DHCP, DNS and a webserver to provide network services and business network applications.

2)           Run tests to demonstrate that you have formulated a correct solution to the problem and full network connectivity is possible using ipv4 and ipv6.

3)           Recommend and demonstrate configuration of device security policies  for routers and switches on the network.

Write up your work in the form of a report that discusses and analyses the design of the network and the addressing scheme. Also discuss and analyse the configuration and commands that you used to configure the addresses, routing protocols and authentication. Discuss and analyse the results of the tests that you made on the network.  Formulate conclusions and recommendations from your work and the results. The report should address all points raised in the marking scheme below.

 

 

 

Assessment criteria

Evidence of knowledge, problem solving, implementation and professional skills will be required. See enclosed details.

 

Learning Outcomes

This assessment will enable students to demonstrate in full or in part the learning outcomes identified in the unit

T1      Present information and evaluation on an independently researched topic descriptors.

C1      Design an addressing scheme to fulfil given requirements in IPv4 and IPv6 networks.

P1      Demonstrate a sound justification for the approach adopted in designing an Ethernet network using routers and switches.

 

This assessment will enable students to demonstrate in full or in part the learning outcomes identified in the unit descriptors.

Late Submissions

 

Students are reminded that:

 

i.         If this assessment is submitted late i.e. within 5 working days of the submission deadline, the mark will be capped at 40% if a pass mark is achieved;

ii.        If this assessment is submitted later than 5 working days after the submission deadline, the work will be regarded as a non-submission and will be awarded a zero;

iii.      If this assessment is being submitted as a referred piece of work (second or third attempt) then it must be submitted by the deadline date; any Refer assessment submitted late will be regarded as a non-submission and will be awarded a zero.

 

http://portal.solent.ac.uk/documents/academic-services/academic-handbook/section-2/2o-assessment-policy-annex-1-assessment-regulations.pdf?t=1411116004479

 

Extenuating Circumstances

The University’s Extenuating Circumstances procedure is in place if there are genuine circumstances that may prevent a student submitting an assessment. If students are not 'fit to study’, they can either request an extension to the submission deadline of 5 working days or they can request to submit the assessment at the next opportunity (Defer).  In both instances students must submit an EC application with relevant evidence.   If accepted by the EC Panel there will be no academic penalty for late submission or non-submission dependent on what is requested.  Students are reminded that EC covers only short term issues (20 working days) and that if they experience longer term matters that impact on learning then they must contact a Student Achievement Officer for advice.

 

A summary of guidance notes for students is given below:

 

http://portal.solent.ac.uk/documents/academic-services/academic-handbook/section-4/4p-extenuating-circumstances-procedures-for-students.pdf?t=1472716668952

 

 

Academic Misconduct

Any submission must be students’ own work and, where facts or ideas have been used from other sources, these sources must be appropriately referenced. The University’s Academic Handbook includes the definitions of all practices that will be deemed to constitute academic misconduct.  Students should check this link before submitting their work.

 

Procedures relating to student academic misconduct are given below:

 

http://portal.solent.ac.uk/support/official-documents/information-for-students/complaints-conduct/student-academic-misconduct.aspx

 

 

 

Ethics Policy

The work being carried out by students must be in compliance with the Ethics Policy. Where there is an ethical issue, as specified within the Ethics Policy, then students will need an ethics release or an ethical approval prior to the start of the project.

 

The Ethics Policy is contained within Section 2S of the Academic Handbook:

http://portal.solent.ac.uk/documents/academic-services/academic-handbook/section-2/2s-university-ethics-policy.pdf

 

 

Grade marking

The University uses a letter grade scale for the marking of assessments. Unless students have been specifically informed otherwise their marked assignment will be awarded a letter grade. More detailed information on grade marking and the grade scale can be found on the portal and in the Student Handbook.

 

Policy:             http://portal.solent.ac.uk/documents/academic-services/academic-handbook/section-2/2o-assessment-policy.pdf

 

 

Guidance for online submission through Solent Online Learning (SOL)

 

http://learn.solent.ac.uk/onlinesubmission

 



Criteria

F3...........................................F1

D3..........................................D1

C3.........................................C1

B3.............................................B1

A4..................................................A1

1. Design & implementation of ipv4 and ipv6 addressing scheme & referencing (30%)

Little attempt to produce satisfactory or workable ipv4 and/or no description at how the scheme was derived, and/or no references.

Satisfactory introduction and description of how a workable ipv4 addressing scheme was derived. Some references used.

 

Good introduction and discussion of decisions made that evidence a correctly formulated ipv4 addressing scheme. Supported by a range of references.

Very good introduction and discussion of networking design requirements and discussion of decisions made that evidence a correctly formulated ipv4 addressing scheme. Supported by a good range of references.

Excellent introduction and analysis of networking design requirements and comprehensive justification of decisions made that evidence a full and correctly formulated ipv4 scheme. Analysis is supported by an excellent range of references.

2. Research and specify static routes or  routing protocols to meet defined requirements & referencing (30%)

Poor discussion of an/or evidence of a working solution with little proof of support from tests and /or no references

 

Satisfactory introduction and discussion of working solutions to the problem evidenced by description of test results. Some references used.

Good introduction and discussion and demonstration of a working solution to the problem evidenced by discussion of a sequence of test results. Supported by a range of references.

Introduces and demonstrates very good understanding of the routing design requirements and is able to discuss and prove a working solution to meet them evidenced by analysis of a sequence of test results. Supported by a good range of references.

Introduces and demonstrates excellent and professional understanding of the routing design requirements and is able to comprehensively analyse and prove a fully working solution to meet all of them evidenced by comprehensive analysis of a thorough sequence of test results. Analysis of solutions supported by an excellent range of references.

3. Design, implementation and testing  (20%)

Poor discussion of an/or evidence of a working solutions with little proof of support from tests and/or no references

 

Satisfactory introduction and discussion of working solutions for some additional services evidenced by description of test results. Some references used.

Good introduction and discussion and demonstration of a working solution for additional services evidenced by discussion of a sequence of test results. Supported by a range of references.

Introduces and Demonstrates very good understanding of the additional services required and is able to discuss and prove a working solution to meet them evidenced by analysis of a sequence of test results. Supported by a good range of references.

Introduces and Demonstrates excellent and professional understanding of the additional services required and is able to comprehensively analyse and prove a fully working solution to meet all of them evidenced by comprehensive analysis of a thorough sequence of test results. Analysis of solutions supported by an excellent range of references.

4. Conclusions and recommendations that relate to the case study & referencing P1 (20%)

Poor conclusions and recommendations. Doesn’t relate to the case study and/or no references.

Satisfactory conclusions and recommendations that relate to the case study by evaluating the effectiveness of the solution. Some references used.

Good conclusions and recommendations that relate well to the case study and evaluation of the effectiveness of the solution. Supported by a range of references.

Very good conclusions and recommendations that relate fully to the case study, fully evaluating the solution and alternatives. Supported by a good range of references.

Excellent and professional conclusions and recommendations that are fully justified and meaningful in the context of the case study, including professional evaluation of effectiveness of the solution informed by excellent references.

Report      (50% of unit mark)   Marking scheme