IB Computer Science (CS) SL Extended Essay Example

The topic statement is clearly presented but could be refined into a concise, standalone title that directly reflects the investigation focus.

The hypothesis lacks a precise quantitative prediction. Defining expected effect size (e.g. % difference) would strengthen focus.

The inclusion of multiple performance metrics (ratio, time, speed) demonstrates a robust methodology design.

The reflection on methodology choices is limited to descriptive comments. Deeper evaluative reflection on setbacks and adaptations would improve engagement.

The sequence for accessing directories via cd is correct; consider adding commentary on directory structure relevance.

The rationale for excluding non‐Latin scripts via “UTF-δ¹ theory” is unclear. Either clarify this theory or reference a standard source for UTF-8 assignment fairness.

The explanation of lossless compression is clear and supported by a relevant UDHR example, demonstrating effective understanding.

The description of dictionary-based encoding conflates tokens and substrings. Clarify how LZW uniquely indexes new substrings.

The entropy formula $H(p_1,...,p_n)=-{\sum }_i{p}_i{\log }_2{p}_i$ is correctly stated and positioned. Ensure each symbol is consistently defined.

The comparison to Shannon–Fano coding is accurate; this contextualizes Huffman’s optimality effectively.

The statement “we would require 7-bits per character” oversimplifies ASCII storage, which uses 8-bit bytes. Note this nuance for precision.

Mentioning overhead in timings is critical; indicate how overhead was subtracted or accounted for in small-file experiments.

The qualitative section lists plausible linguistic factors but remains largely descriptive. Develop an analytical link to the RQ.

The discussion interprets mean values without quantifying variability or significance. Including standard deviations or error bars would deepen analysis.

The table of contents displays inconsistent indentation and page‐number alignment. Consider adjusting column widths and indentation to improve readability.

Figure 4’s binary tree diagram lacks axis labels or a brief caption to guide interpretation. Add concise labels.

The LZW example table on page 10 is very long and breaks the flow. Consider moving it to the appendix with a summary in the main text.

Table 7 headings “Compressed size Huffman” vs “Compressed size LZW” use different phrasing. Standardize labels for consistency.