Filter by keyword, subject, or both. Updates live as new model answers are added to our portal.
Time Series Modelling
Time Series Modelling Case Study – Oil Price Forecasting
This individual Time Series Modelling Case Study focuses on analysing and forecasting oil price data using established time-series techniques and an alternative modelling approach. The assessment requires students to work with daily oil price information covering the period from 2024 to 2026 and investigate the underlying patterns, stationarity and forecasting behaviour of the data. The first part of the assignment involves exploratory data analysis and time-series modelling using an ARMA-based approach. Students are required to create appropriate visualisations of the data, perform exploratory analysis and conduct tests for non-stationarity, including relevant stationarity diagnostics such as ADF, ACF and PACF analysis and differencing where required. An ARMA model must then be defined, with suitable model parameters identified using the AIC likelihood approach. The assessment requires the student to examine possible combinations of model parameters, assess model residuals, evaluate model performance using appropriate metrics such as RMSE, and produce forecasts extending 24 months into the future. Confidence intervals must also be included with the forecasts. The second part requires students to investigate an alternative modelling solution for the same oil-price time-series data. Possible approaches discussed in the assignment include models such as LSTM and Prophet. Students are expected to conduct a literature review relating to the selected alternative model, build and apply the model, tune relevant hyperparameters where appropriate, generate 24-month forecasts, create suitable visualisations and calculate appropriate evaluation metrics. The final part of the assessment requires a 6–8 page report describing the modelling process, forecasts, analysis and inferences. The report should explain the reasoning behind the analytical and modelling choices rather than simply presenting numerical results. Students are expected to critically discuss why particular approaches were selected, how the modelling decisions may have influenced the results, how forecasts compare with subsequently collected real data where available, and what improvements could be made in future work. The assessment evaluates both the technical implementation and the quality of the written analysis. The code component assesses completion of the modelling and forecasting tasks, stationarity testing, the alternative solution, code quality and annotation. The report component assesses discussion of the analysis and inferences, comparison of the modelling approaches, clarity of interpretation, report structure, appropriate use of figures and suitable academic references. The submission consists of a report in PDF or Word format, with the code submitted separately or through an appropriate repository.
Read Model Answer →
Enterprise Business Start-up: Sustainable Business Plan, Fundraising Strategy and Entrepreneurial Reflection
Entrepreneurship, Business Start-up, Business Plan, Business Idea, Innovation, Sustainable Business, Market Gap, Market Research, Competitor Analysis, Customer Segmentation, Customer Profiles, Product Development, Marketing Strategy, Marketing Communications, Business Model, Costing, Pricing Strategy, Sales Forecasting, Revenue Model, Financial Planning, Founding Team, Core Competencies, Fundraising Strategy, Venture Capital, Angel Investment, Entrepreneurial Tendency, GET Test, Entrepreneurial Self-Assessment, Start-up Finance, Business Pitch
Read Model Answer →
Data Science / Time Series Analysis / Machine Learning
Time Series Modelling Case Study: Oil Price Forecasting with ARMA and Alternative Models
This Time Series Modelling Case Study requires students to analyse real-world oil-price time-series data and develop forecasting models capable of predicting future values. The assessment combines traditional statistical time-series techniques with an alternative forecasting approach, requiring students to demonstrate practical modelling skills, critical research engagement and evidence-based interpretation of forecasting results. The coursework is completed individually and contributes 40% of the assessment. assing,,, (1) The assessment is divided into three main parts. Part 1 focuses on developing an ARMA-based forecasting model using daily oil-price data covering approximately 2024 to 2026. Students begin with exploratory data analysis and initial visualisation before testing whether the time series is stationary. Where necessary, appropriate transformations or differencing must be applied to obtain stationarity. Students then define an ARMA model and identify suitable p, d and q parameters using an AIC-based model-selection procedure across the parameter ranges specified in the brief. assing,,, (1) Model adequacy must be assessed using diagnostic analysis. Students inspect residuals, generate additional ACF plots, examine residual distributions and evaluate prediction performance using appropriate metrics such as RMSE. The selected model is then used to forecast oil prices 24 months into the future, with appropriate confidence intervals added to communicate forecast uncertainty. assing,,, (1) Part 2 requires students to research and implement an alternative forecasting approach. Suggested examples include LSTM and Prophet, although another appropriate model may be proposed. Students conduct a literature review supporting the alternative method, build and where relevant hyperparameter-tune the model, generate another 24-month forecast, visualise predictions and confidence intervals, and calculate suitable evaluation metrics. This component is intended to demonstrate independent research and the ability to propose an alternative solution rather than relying only on the conventional ARMA approach. assing,,, (1) Part 3 consists of a 6–8 page technical report explaining the modelling process, forecasting results and resulting inferences. The report should provide a critical analysis rather than simply reproducing numerical outputs. Students are expected to explain why results occurred, justify modelling choices, evaluate how those choices influenced performance, compare forecasts with subsequently observed real data where possible, and construct a coherent narrative supported by plots, images, summary statistics and academic literature. Future improvements to the modelling approach should also be critically discussed. assing,,, (1) Submission consists of both the report and working code. The code may be submitted directly or through an accessible Colab or GitHub repository and must reproduce all models, figures and numerical results presented in the report. The assessment allocates 60% of the marks to code and 40% to the report. Within the coding component, modelling and forecasting completion accounts for 40 marks and code quality and annotation for 20 marks. The report is assessed on analysis and inference, methodological justification, comparison of the two modelling approaches, presentation quality, figures and use of appropriate references. assing,,, (1) Key technical expectations include appropriate testing for stationarity, use of methods such as ADF, ACF, PACF and differencing, systematic model selection, forecasting, evaluation and clear comparison between the traditional ARMA model and the chosen alternative approach. Higher-quality work is expected to interpret what the forecasts mean, identify potential improvements and demonstrate sound technical communication rather than merely reporting model outputs. assing,,, (1) Important for the public Reference Library: the brief explicitly states that students must not use generative AI to write the report, and the rubric indicates that AI text-generation use may result in zero marks for the whole assignment. Therefore, the public entry should remain a high-level description of the assessment rather than material intended for direct submission. assing,,, (1)
Read Model Answer →
Data Science
1,000 words
Data Investigation Pipeline — Exploratory Analysis and Statistical Evaluation of a Chosen Dataset
This assessment simulates the opening stages of a real data investigation. Students choose their own research question and dataset, then build the full pipeline from raw data through preparation, exploration and statistical testing to visualisation — and, where the question supports it, simple modelling or forecasting. Either Python or R is acceptable; the statistical route through R typically expects an explicit hypothesis rather than a purely exploratory question. The work is structured around an established process methodology such as CRISP-DM, and the development journey is documented alongside the code rather than reported after the fact. The usual submission format is a single notebook combining markdown and code cells, so the written report and the analysis sit in one artefact, though a word-processed document containing the code is normally also accepted. The written element is short — around a thousand words — which makes selection the hardest part of the task. It must cover the scenario, the data collection, the exploratory analysis, the reasoning behind the choice of statistical tests, their results, and the visualisations. Students routinely spend that budget describing what they did and leave nothing for why. The mark distribution makes the priority explicit. Framing the problem and the data source carries the smallest share. Preparation and exploratory analysis, and evaluation of the results in context, carry the bulk in roughly equal measure. That final component is where most marks are lost: it asks for an honest assessment of accuracy, limitations and usefulness. A notebook that produces clean output and then claims more than the data supports scores below one that reports a modest result and explains precisely why it is modest. Established metrics should be used for the statistical tests, and published research cited where it informs the background or interprets the findings. Note that assessments of this type increasingly include a live demonstration in which the student explains their own project to verify authorship, so every line of the submitted work needs to be something the student can talk through unprompted. Our support on assessments of this type is guidance-based. Typical areas of help include: explaining how to scope a research question so the analysis fits the word limit, clarifying which statistical test suits which data type and why, reviewing whether a chosen visualisation communicates what it claims, showing how to write an honest limitations section, checking Harvard referencing, and reviewing a student's own draft notebook against the published marking criteria.
Read Model Answer →