IB Mathematics Applications & Interpretation (AI) SL Internal Assessment Example

The scoring table template is included but left blank. Ensure to input your achieved scores or remove unused table elements to maintain a polished presentation.

The title clearly states the investigation’s focus on locating an optician but could be more concise by removing redundancy (‘new Opticians’) or specifying context. Consider tightening the phrasing for clarity and precision.

The table of contents is structured but contains blank page references for some sub-sections (e.g., ‘Constructing a Voronoi diagram’). Complete all page numbers to improve navigability.

Several entries wrap inconsistently and some labels (e.g., ‘Obtaining points–’) could be indented to reflect hierarchy more clearly. Refine formatting for improved coherence.

This background section includes useful context but spends excessive length on general trends in digital eye strain. Focus more tightly on mathematical rationale to enhance relevance and conciseness.

Your rationale for using Google Maps is clear, but the spelling of ‘guaranteeing’ is incorrect and should be corrected. Careful proofreading ensures professional presentation.

The caption ‘Figure 1: Map of labelled sites’ is informative, but consider positioning it directly below the figure and formatting it consistently with other captions.

The vertices’ coordinates are neatly tabulated, but the table heading merges columns ambiguously. Adjust the heading span or labeling for clearer presentation.

The concluding sentence is cut off (‘This is’). Review page breaks to avoid interrupted thoughts and ensure your argument flows cohesively.

Coordinates are presented to two decimal places, but rounding is inconsistent (e.g., .75 vs whole number). Apply uniform rounding rules and state them in the caption for clarity.

Figure 1 visually locates the sites but lacks a scale or legend, making spatial interpretation difficult. Include clearer axis labels or a scale bar for improved mathematical communication.

The midpoint calculation is correct, but consider adding notation such as $x_m$ and $y_m$ definitions within your text to support mathematical communication.

The diagram of perpendicular bisectors (Figure 2) is an effective representation, but the image is somewhat blurred. A higher resolution or vector graphic would enhance clarity.

Specifying “1 unit = 0.109 km” is essential; however, the source of this conversion is not cited. Add a reference or calculation to justify this factor.

Site H appears in the new diagram without prior introduction or coordinate listing. Ensure all sites are defined before use to maintain consistency.

When introducing $d=\sqrt{(x_2-x_1{)}^2+(y_2-y_1{)}^2}$, include absolute-value notation or explain the choice of sign to avoid ambiguity in distance calculations.

Table 4 summarises vertex distances effectively, but it omits the converted kilometer values. Including both units would enhance clarity and completeness.

The inclusion of personal career aspirations and your own home coordinate demonstrates genuine engagement. This personal approach effectively motivates the mathematical exploration.

Figure 6 introduces the new Voronoi diagram with V3 as a site, which shows initiative. Ensure that its caption accurately reflects all relevant changes to prevent confusion.

Your conclusion reiterates practical benefits but lacks mathematical reflection on results’ sensitivity. Consider briefly discussing how varying parameters might shift the optimal site.

You list multiple qualitative limitations but do not quantitatively assess their impact. Including a brief sensitivity analysis or alternative metric would deepen your reflection.

The definition of a perpendicular bisector is imprecise: it bisects a segment at its midpoint at a right angle. Revise this wording to reinforce mathematical accuracy.

Rounding in Table 2 is inconsistent: the slope $-\frac{707}{55}$ is given as -12.9 (1 dp) rather than to 2 dp. Standardize to the stated 2 dp for consistency.

Figure 5 clearly identifies Voronoi vertices, which aids understanding of potential locations. This visual strengthens your geometric analysis.

The computation for V2 to site E correctly applies the distance formula, yet the intermediate arithmetic (e.g., squared differences) could be shown to strengthen mathematical rigor.