Filter by keyword, subject, or both. Updates live as new model answers are added to our portal.
Machine Learning on Big Data
3,000 words
Machine Learning on Big Data using PySpark
This group assessment for the Machine Learning on Big Data module requires students to apply machine learning techniques to a large real-world dataset using PySpark DataFrame and Spark ML. The coursework is designed to develop practical understanding of big data processing, machine learning implementation, model optimisation and evaluation. Students work in groups of three or four and complete a machine learning project using a suitable large dataset obtained from a benchmarking source such as Kaggle, their workplace or another valid resource. The recommended dataset size is between 300 MB and 1 GB. The main task requires students to select a dataset containing multiple classes rather than a binary classification problem and develop an appropriate machine learning solution. The project begins with loading and preprocessing the data using PySpark DataFrame. Students are expected to address issues such as missing values, data normalisation, feature engineering and class imbalance. For text datasets, additional preprocessing techniques such as stemming, lemmatisation and TF-IDF may be applied. Students must then select and implement an appropriate machine learning method using PySpark MLlib or the Spark ML package. The brief permits approaches including multiclass classification, clustering, ensemble learning and text mining. Model parameters must be optimised using techniques such as grid search or random search. Students are required to evaluate their trained models using suitable metrics, including accuracy, F1-score, precision, recall and classification matrices where appropriate. The brief encourages students to maintain model accuracy and robustness above 90% for the highest possible mark and to discuss steps taken to address bias and variance. The results must be visualised or printed clearly, with appropriate interpretation and analysis of the findings. Students must also consider Legal, Social, Ethical and Professional (LSEP) issues throughout the project. Each student selects one LSEP principle and discusses relevant concerns such as dataset bias, privacy or ethical implications, together with suitable mitigation strategies. The final report should be approximately 3,000 words with a tolerance of ±10% and submitted as a single HTML report using the template provided on the module Moodle site. The report should consolidate the individual contributions of all group members into one comprehensive and user-friendly analytics report. The main assessment is weighted 60% for the report and 40% for the group presentation. The presentation is conducted online through Microsoft Teams, and all group members must participate. The assessment evaluates understanding of Spark, preprocessing, modelling, optimisation, evaluation and the ability to explain and interpret the implemented solution.
Read Model Answer →
Big Data Analytics / Machine Learning
3,000 words
Machine Learning on Big Data Using PySpark: Large-Scale Data Analysis and Predictive Modelling
This group-based Machine Learning on Big Data project requires students to apply machine learning techniques to a large real-world dataset using PySpark DataFrames and Spark machine-learning libraries. Students select a substantial dataset, ideally between approximately 300 MB and 1 GB, from sources such as Kaggle, workplace data or other valid repositories, and develop an end-to-end big-data analytics workflow. CN7030 CRWK 26T1 The project begins with data loading and preprocessing using PySpark. Students are expected to handle missing values, perform data normalisation and feature engineering, identify class imbalance and propose appropriate mitigation strategies. Where text datasets are selected, additional preprocessing may include stemming, lemmatization and TF-IDF representation. CN7030 CRWK 26T1 The modelling stage requires implementation of an appropriate machine-learning approach using PySpark MLlib or Spark ML. The brief expects a multiclass rather than binary classification problem and allows techniques including multiclass classification, ensemble learning, clustering and text mining. Students must justify their model choice and consider model robustness, bias and variance when attempting to improve predictive performance. CN7030 CRWK 26T1 Students then perform hyperparameter tuning using techniques such as grid search or random search and evaluate the resulting model with appropriate measures. Relevant evaluation outputs may include accuracy, F1-score, precision, recall and a confusion matrix. Results should also be visualised or clearly presented and interpreted to identify meaningful patterns and performance characteristics. CN7030 CRWK 26T1 The project additionally requires consideration of Legal, Social, Ethical and Professional (LSEP) issues. Students discuss potential ethical concerns associated with their dataset, including bias and privacy risks, and propose suitable mitigation strategies. The final work is consolidated into a single user-friendly HTML analytics report that clearly presents the group's preprocessing, modelling, optimisation, evaluation and interpretation. CN7030 CRWK 26T1 CN7030 CRWK 26T1 Overview word count: approximately 335 words. If you are also uploading the presentation separately to the Reference Library, that should be a second entry under “Presentations and Academic Posters”, because the presentation forms a distinct 40% component and assesses understanding of Spark, preprocessing, modelling, optimisation, evaluation and responses to examiner questions. CN7030 CRWK 26T1
Read Model Answer →
Data Mining
Data Mining – Classification, Model Optimisation and Evaluation
This individual Data Mining assignment requires students to apply the techniques covered in the module using the WEKA data mining platform. The assessment is worth 40% and focuses on practical application of machine learning and data mining methods, requiring students to configure algorithms, analyse datasets, optimise model parameters, evaluate classification performance and explain their technical choices and results. The assignment also assesses the ability to critically evaluate different algorithms and models of data mining. The assignment includes several tasks covering different stages of the data mining process. Students are required to work with supplied datasets and use appropriate preprocessing and classification techniques. The datasets include a balanced screenshot dataset containing processed screenshots classified into categories such as "Okay" and "Bad", where the objective is to train a model capable of identifying inappropriate content. The data has been processed using PCA to provide a smaller four-dimensional representation while protecting privacy and reducing the size of the data. Another supplied dataset concerns furniture reviews, containing positive ("pos") and negative ("neg") written feedback, with the objective of building a model that can determine whether a furniture review belongs to either class. The assessment evaluates students' ability to understand and describe the datasets, including the number of instances, number of columns, data types and relevant statistical information. For text-based data, students must apply appropriate vectorisation and describe the resulting dataset characteristics. Students must also consider class imbalance and apply an appropriate method where necessary, explaining how the chosen approach affects the distribution of instances between the classes. A significant component of the assignment involves classification algorithms and parameter optimisation. The assessment requires students to work with algorithms including Naive Bayes, LibSVM and J48. Students must investigate appropriate parameters and perform parameter searches or fine grid searches to identify suitable configurations. They must explain the selected parameters, their impact on the model and the reasoning behind the chosen values. Model performance must be evaluated using appropriate validation techniques, including cross-validation. Students are required to compare the algorithms using results such as overall accuracy and confusion matrices. The assignment expects students to identify an appropriate or best-performing algorithm in the context of the dataset and to provide a clear explanation of the comparison rather than simply reporting numerical results. The rubric places emphasis on accurate configuration, clear explanation of parameter choices, dataset analysis, class-balance treatment, parameter optimisation, cross-validation and critical comparison of algorithm strengths and weaknesses. High-quality work should explain both the technical process and the implications of the results, with results presented clearly through appropriate tables, confusion matrices and graphical outputs where required. The submission must be a single PDF document containing the report and must not exceed 10 pages. Students are instructed to include their student ID at the beginning of the report but not their name or other identifying details so that marking remains anonymous. Screenshots are specifically required to demonstrate use of the student's ID number as the random seed; other WEKA results should be presented in the student's own tables or result formats. The brief also states that no research beyond the material covered in the module is required and therefore no citations or reference list are required. The assignment explicitly prohibits the use of Generative AI tools for creating content and prohibits using GenAI tools or proofreading services for proofreading. Students are expected to complete the practical work themselves and explain their own technical choices and results.
Read Model Answer →
Machine Learning / Data Mining / Text Mining
Machine Learning Analysis of Classification Models and Text Mining on Furniture Review Data
This technical machine-learning report demonstrates the practical application of predictive modelling and text mining using WEKA. The work is divided into two major tasks. The first evaluates and compares Support Vector Machine and Decision Tree classification models, while the second applies text-mining techniques to furniture-review data and compares multiple classifiers after preprocessing, feature selection and class balancing. The first task uses the Screenshots.arff dataset to investigate the performance of libSVM and J48 Decision Tree classifiers. A 70% training and 30% testing split is applied, and the models are manually tuned to examine how different parameter settings affect predictive performance. For libSVM, an RBF kernel is used while different gamma and cost values are tested through grid-search-style experimentation. The report identifies gamma 0.03 and cost 2 as the strongest tested combination, producing approximately 91.67% accuracy on the test split. The J48 model is also optimised by adjusting the confidence factor used for pruning. Several confidence-factor values are examined, with 0.09 producing the strongest reported result of 80% accuracy. The optimised SVM and J48 models are then compared using five-fold cross-validation, where libSVM achieves 89.75% accuracy compared with 81.25% for J48. The second task focuses on text mining of Furniture Reviews. Text preprocessing includes TF-IDF term weighting, stopword removal, stemming, conversion to lowercase and word-count generation. The resulting textual dataset is transformed into a numerical feature representation suitable for machine-learning classification. Dimensionality reduction is performed using InfoGainAttributeEval with Ranker, selecting the 900 most informative attributes. The dataset is then balanced using WEKA techniques including Resample and SpreadSubsample to reduce class bias before classification. Finally, three classifiers—Naive Bayes, libSVM and J48—are evaluated on the balanced text dataset. The reported accuracies are 90.52% for Naive Bayes, 58.62% for libSVM and 78.45% for J48. The analysis concludes that Naive Bayes performs strongest for the processed furniture-review dataset, while the wider exercise demonstrates the importance of preprocessing, parameter tuning, feature selection, class balancing and appropriate model evaluation in producing reliable classification results. Important: this upload appears to be the completed student report, not the actual assessment guideline. Because the document does not state the university, module name, academic level, academic year, required word count or prescribed referencing style, I would leave those fields as Not specified rather than guessing.
Read Model Answer →