Student Proposal Template: Designing scoring.yaml

Assignment for April 3

Use the template below to propose your own version of a scoring model for the gallery wall problem.

You may modify, remove, or add fields, but you must explain your choices.

Part 1: Your Proposed Criteria

Create at least 4–6 criteria that you believe are important for evaluating a gallery wall.

criteria:
  - id: example_criterion
    label: "Short human-readable name"
    description: "What does this measure, and why does it matter?"
    scale:
      min: 0
      max: 100
      low_meaning: "What does a LOW value represent?"
      high_meaning: "What does a HIGH value represent?"
    preferred_value: 50
    tolerance: 20
    importance: 0.5

Copy and expand this structure for each of your criteria.

Part 2: Explanation of Your Criteria

For each criterion, briefly answer:

  • Why did you include this?
  • Is this measuring selection (which artworks are chosen), arrangement (where they are placed), or both?
  • Is this something that should be:
    • maximized,
    • minimized,
    • or targeted toward a specific value?

Part 3: Opposing Dimensions

Identify at least two criteria that represent a spectrum (not just “more is better”).

Examples:

  • unity vs diversity
  • harmony vs contrast
  • consistency vs surprise

For each, explain:

  • Why it should be treated as a range with a target, rather than a simple maximum
  • What happens if the system pushes too far in either direction

Part 4: Human Interaction Design

Describe how the curator will interact with your scoring model.

What will the interface allow the curator to do?

For example:

  • adjust sliders for preferred values
  • change importance weights
  • lock certain artworks in place
  • indicate that something “improved” or “got worse”
  • choose between two candidate layouts

Be specific. What inputs does the system expect after each iteration?

Part 5: Hill Climbing Moves

What kinds of changes (neighbors) should the algorithm try?

List and describe at least 4 types of moves, such as:

  • swapping one artwork
  • reordering two artworks
  • replacing one artwork with another
  • moving a piece to a new position
  • preserving a “locked” artwork while changing others

Explain why your choices are useful.

Part 6: Scoring Strategy

Describe how your system should score a wall.

Specifically:

  • Should the system try to maximize values, or match preferred targets?
  • How should tolerance be handled?
  • How should different criteria be combined into a final score?

You do not need full code, but be precise enough that someone could implement it.

Part 7: Reflection

Answer briefly:

  • What is the hardest part of designing this system?
  • What assumptions are you making about the curator?
  • Where do you think your design might fail or behave poorly?

Optional Extension (For Stronger Proposals)

If you want to go further, consider:

  • Should the system learn curator preferences over time?
  • Should it remember past feedback?
  • Could it detect contradictions in curator input?
  • Could it suggest adjustments to the scoring model itself?

Goal

The goal is not to get the “right” answer.

The goal is to design a system that:

  • clearly represents curatorial intent
  • can be used by a human in an iterative process
  • and can realistically guide a hill-climbing algorithm
Scroll to Top