IB Computer Science (CS) SL Extended Essay Example

The research question is stated prominently and remains central throughout the report, demonstrating clear focus and connection to subsequent sections.

The motivation linking encoding time and file size to server resources and user experience shows clear understanding of practical relevance.

The introduction frames the streaming challenge effectively, but the sentence “video codecs with encode the data” is awkward. Revise for clarity (e.g., “codecs encode raw video data”).

Independent, dependent, and control variables are well identified, but justify selection of video sample criteria to strengthen methodological rigor.

Procedural steps are detailed and logical, though adding code snippets inline could immediately illustrate script structure without referring to appendices.

Terminology like “HEVC” and “AV1” is introduced accurately, but including publication years in citations (e.g., Haivision, n.d.) would strengthen academic precision.

Your background section defines video codecs well, but expanding on how encoding parameters (bitrate, resolution) directly tie to complexity could deepen understanding.

The explanation of CTUs, CUs and quadtrees is technically clear; graphics (Figure 1) reinforce the description effectively.

The overview of transformation and quantization uses accurate terms (DCT, DST, TUs), though “Discreate Sine Transform” is a typo—correct to “Discrete Sine Transform”.

Your explanation of entropy coding and CABAC is comprehensive, demonstrating excellent grasp of context modeling and arithmetic coding processes.

The time complexity section defines Big O effectively and uses an illustrative figure to support understanding of asymptotic trends.

When introducing AV1’s multi-symbol encoding, including a brief comparison to HEVC’s single-symbol context enhances critical evaluation of algorithmic trade-offs.

The data-processing section correctly derives frames per video, but explicitly linking this step to the research question would reinforce analytical relevance.

Graphs are used effectively to visualize encoding time and file-size trends, supporting comparative analysis across codecs.

When fitting models, you adjust the y-intercept to zero; justify this choice statistically to avoid introducing bias in intercept estimation.

The comparison of linear vs quadratic fits using R² is sound; consider adding p-values or confidence intervals to strengthen statistical robustness.

Discussion recognizes quality–compression trade-offs but could further evaluate how CDEF and IDTX impact perceptual metrics, not just file size.

The conclusion reflects on limitations and suggests extending the experiment, showing evaluative reflection on methodology.

The candidate code is clearly displayed, but consider repositioning it under a standard header rather than inline to enhance presentation clarity.

Consider adding dot leaders between section titles and page numbers to improve visual alignment and reader usability in the contents.

The table of contents is comprehensive and well organized, supporting navigation through the investigation’s structure.

In the prediction subsection, the last sentence is cut off. Ensure complete paragraphs to maintain coherence and reader comprehension.

Equations are correctly formatted in LaTeX; ensure all variables (e.g., $x$, $y$) are defined immediately to avoid reader confusion.

The list of control variables covers key factors. Consider grouping related items under sub-headings to improve reader clarity.

Raw data tables are presented clearly, but including units in column headers (e.g., “Time (s)”) would improve immediate interpretability.

Bibliography entries are formatted consistently in APA style, demonstrating attention to source accuracy and consistency.