DA226X Degree Project in Computer Science and Communication, Second Cycle 30.0 credits

Before the degree project course is started, the student should have identified an appropriate degree project task and formulated a project proposal so that this can be presented to examiner for approval. The assignment should be chosen, so that it implies a natural progression of the knowledge and skills that have been acquired within the education and in a possible specialisation within the education.

The student should write an individual plan for the degree project in which the problem description/assignment and the preconditions for the implementation of the work should be specified. The individual plan for the degree project should contain background including problem description and scientific issues, purpose, objective, demarcations, the project's relevance [1], methods and time plan for the implementation of the degree project. The plan should also contain a brief self-reflection, where the student accounts for his or her prior knowledge for carrying out the assignment and planning for how possible remaining courses that are required for higher education qualification should be completed [2]. The individual plan for the degree project should be approved by the examiner.

The student should carry out a specialised pilot study including discussion of method choice and theoretical background with a literature study, that is reported as part of a draft to a preliminary version of the written degree project report.

The student should carry out an individual independent project, where knowledge and methods from the education are applied.

The student should plan and carry out oral presentation and defence of his or her degree project.

The student should carry out an oral and written review of another degree project on the same level.

The student should write and present a written degree project report, where the student clearly accounts for and discusses his or her conclusions in the degree project and the knowledge and the arguments that underlie them.

The student should carry out a self evaluation of the degree project according to the model of "Assessment of the quality of degree project for Degree of Master of Science in Engineering and Degree of Master of Science".

[1] With relevance we mean relevance in relation to the education, current research and development in relation to the specialisation that the student is studying and relevance for stakeholders and society.

[2] A draft of this part can preferably be handed in together with the initial project proposition, before the student is admitted to the degree project course. Remaining courses within the education should be planned be completed latest in connection with conclusion of the degree project.

The degree project [1] has as aim that the student should apply and deepen knowledge, understanding, abilities and approach within the context of the education. The degree project should be carried out at the end of the education and imply a specialised study and synthesis of earlier acquired knowledge. In the degree project is emphasised both the technical/scientific content and method knowledge.

After completed degree project, the student should show such proficiency that is required to participate in research and development work or to work independently in other qualified activities according to the national qualitative targets for the Degree of Master of Science in the Higher Education Ordinance. These include:

• considerably advanced knowledge within the main field of study/the specialisation for the education, including advanced insight into current research and development work,
• specialised methodological knowledge within the main field of study/the specialisation for the education,
• ability to participate in research and development work and so contribute to the formation of knowledge
• ability to critically and independently and creatively identify, formulate, analyse, assess and deal with complex phenomena, issues and situations even with limited information,
• ability to plan and with adequate methods undertake advanced tasks within predetermined time frames as well as the ability to evaluate this work
• ability to critically and systematically integrate knowledge and ability to identify the need of additional knowledge
• ability to in English in speech and writing clearly report and discuss his or her conclusions and the knowledge and arguments on which they are based
• ability to within the frames of the degree project identify the role of the scholarship and the engineer in the society
• ability to within the frame of the specific degree project be able to identify which issues that need to be answered in order to observe relevant dimensions of sustainable development, and
• ability to within the frames of the degree project assess and show awareness of ethical aspects on research and development work with respect to methods, working method and results of the degree project.

[1] Also designated independent project

• The degree project is an individual independent project, carried out by one student. Several students working within the same project should result in individual reports, where each report has to satisfy the requirements for a degree project.
• The student should contact an appropriate examiner before the work is started. Alternatively, the director of studies for degree projects or the programme director may propose an examiner.
• The student should prepare a brief written project proposal describing the work. This description should be enclosed to the registration basis. The description should contain background, purpose, objective and method.
• The examiner ensures, that the students satisfy the general and specific entry requirements for the degree project and that the suggested degree project can satisfy the expected learning outcomes for the degree project. The examiner will verify that the degree project falls within the subject area(s) of the study programme(s), and that the questions at issue indicate appropriate progression within the education. The examiner will sign the basis of the registration [1].
• The examiner will appoint a supervisor at KTH and approve a possible industry supervisor in consultation with the director of studies for degree project.
• The degree project will be registered, when the examiner has approved the project proposal [2].
• The student should write a detailed individual plan for the degree project [3] that should be delivered to the examiner for approval.
• The student should carry out pilot study, investigation and choice of method, and literature study, that are delivered for approval by the supervisor at KTH.
• During the implementation of the degree project, the student should regularly (at least every second week) report how the work progresses to the supervisor at KTH.
• The student should continuously during the degree project, document the work in writing and work on the preliminary version of the written report.
• When the supervisor at KTH assesses that the student has reached the objectives, according to the plan for the degree project, and that the quality of the preliminary written report holds high quality, the student should write a self evaluation of the degree project according to the model for "Assessment of the quality of degree project for Degree of Master of Science in Engineering and Degree of Master of Science". The supervisor will give feedback on the self evaluation, and the student will be given the opportunity to remedy possible deficiencies.
• The report and self evaluation should be delivered, together with the supervisor's summary of the assessment of the degree project report, according to the model for "Assessment of the quality of the degree project" to the examiner for a preliminary approval.
• The student is assigned another student who is working on a second-cycle degree project, to publicly discuss his or her degree project report. Date for opposition [4] and choice of degree project report to publicly discuss should be approved by the examiner. The student should carry out an oral and written review of the other student's presentation of his or her degree project. The public discussion is assessed by the examiner of the other student.
• The student should carry out an oral presentation and defence of his or her report.
• No later than two weeks after presentation, the student should deliver a final report to examiner. To the report, the student should enclose an updated self-reflection based on the model for "Assessment of the quality of degree project for Degree of Master of Science in Engineering and Degree of Master of Science".
• The examiner is responsible for the plagiarism checking of the degree project report.
• The examiner will fill in the model for "Assessment of the quality of degree project for Degree of Master of Science in Engineering and Degree of Master of Science".
• The grade should be determined by a teacher (examiner), particularly appointed by the higher education institution.
• The examiner should acquire support for grading from at least one other teacher on KTH, competent in the subject area, (who constitutes reviewer for the degree project).
• The directions for public access at KTH, apply for the implementation of the degree project and for publication of the report. The degree project report should be published electronically in Diva, according to the rules that apply to electronic publication of degree projects at KTH.

[1] The basis of registration is the basis that constitutes the basis for course registration.

[2] is normally carried out by the administration.

[3] See the heading Learning activities.

[4] The public discussion cannot be carried out before the student is admitted to the course.

All courses that are required for issuing the Degree of Bachelor and at least 60 credits of courses for second-cycle studies should be fully completed. These 60 credits should include all courses in the programme(s) [1] relevant to the degree project and a course in the philosophy of science and research methodology. This course should be reported with a pass mark.

[1] In the case that the student is enrolled both on a Master of Science in Engineering and a Master 's programme.

If the course is discontinued, students may request to be examined during the following two academic years.

• PRO1 - Project, 7.5 credits, grading scale: P, F
• PRO2 - Project, 15.0 credits, grading scale: P, F
• PRO3 - Project, 7.5 credits, grading scale: A, B, C, D, E, FX, F

Based on recommendation from KTH’s coordinator for disabilities, the examiner will decide how to adapt an examination for students with documented disability.

The examiner may apply another examination format when re-examining individual students.

· Individual plan for degree project

· Active attendance at two oral presentations of second-cycle degree projects [1]

· Pilot study, discussion of method choice and literature study

· Self evaluation report

· Oral presentation

· Written and oral review of an other student's second-cycle degree project

· Written report with abstract in both Swedish and English

[1] It is recommended that the active attendance at oral presentations takes place early in the process. The item may be given credit for if it has been included in earlier courses. The attendance can also take place on the student's own initiative before the course is started; then there need to exist written documentation on the active attendance.

Requirements according to KTH's regulatory framework for degree projects, and all examination parts as above should be approved within a year from the start of the degree project. Otherwise, the degree project will be ended with failed grade, unless special circumstances apply.

Kristina Höök

Magnus Boman

Stefano Markidis

Panagiotis Papadimitratos

Johan Håstad

Aristides Gionis

Jana Tumova

Rolf Stadler

Mads Dam

Rob Comber

Sten Ternström

Sandra Pauletto

Tino Weinkauf

Jan Gulliksen

Leif Handberg

Arvind Kumar

Roberto Guanciale

Pawel Herman

Roberto Bresin

Patric Jensfelt

Olov Engwall

Jonas Beskow

Cristian Bogdan

Eva-Lotta Sallnäs Pysander

Leif Dahlberg

Robert Lagerström

Carlo Fischione

Mårten Björkman

Joakim Gustafsson

Haibo Li

Martin Monperrus

Elena Troubitsyna

Anders Västberg

Mathias Ekstedt

Bobby Lee Townsend Sturm JR

Henrik Artman

Ylva Fernaeus

Anders Hedman

Erik Fransén

Danica Kragic Jensfelt

Cyrille Artho

Olof Bälter

Viggo Kann

György Dán

Benoit Baudry

• All members of a group are responsible for the group's work.
• In any assessment, every student shall honestly disclose any help received and sources used.
• In an oral assessment, every student shall be able to present and answer questions about the entire assignment and solution.

Further information about the course can be found on the Course web at the link below. Information on the Course web will later be moved to this site.