Android Fruit Recognition Application Proposal Peer Review Report

This report presents a peer review of a proposed Android fruit recognition application. It evaluates the proposal's clarity in defining the problem and outlining the solution, including the application's architecture and required components like visual recognition software and a fruit database. The review analyzes the technical soundness, examining the application's modules (lifecycle handling, liveData, ViewModelling, and Room) and the use of use case diagrams. It also assesses the user interface design, the difficulty level of the proposed system, and provides suggestions for improvement, such as using relevant images and clearer diagrams. The review concludes with a summary of the proposal's strengths and weaknesses, offering a valuable resource for students seeking to understand the development and evaluation of mobile applications. Desklib provides past papers and solved assignments to aid in learning.

Android Fruit Application Proposal Peer Review
Student Name:
Course
Task
1

Table of Contents
Introduction.................................................................................................................................................3
Proposal Clarity of the fruit recognition application....................................................................................3
Proposal Technical Soundness.....................................................................................................................3
Difficult level of the proposed system.........................................................................................................4
Overall Suggestions.....................................................................................................................................4
Reference....................................................................................................................................................5
2

Introduction
Proposal peer review is a technique of evaluating and analyzing a project proposal for the
purpose of making sound decisions in the implementation of the proposed project (OECD,
2011). This document entails a peer review on an fruit recognition android application proposal.
This report provide a thourough analysis of the whole proposal in terms of clarity of the
proposal, technical soundness of the application proposed, difficulties and overall suggestions
(Ludke, 2011). These eavaluations are discussed one by one below.
Proposal Clarity of the fruit recognition application
This proposal has clearly stated the problem that the application is intended to solve. That is, the
fruit recognition application is meant to identify various issues surrounding identification of
fruits across all ages. The proposal outlines a clear process in which the application will help
solve this problem by providing detailed information of the detected fruit captured by the phone.
These statements are easy to understand since they are clearly presented into the proposal. The
proposal also has clearly outlined all the requirements for a successful implementation of the
application. These include visual recognition software, an HD camera, internet and a fruit
database. This provides criteria in which the project should be funded to its completion (Abbott,
2011).
Proposal Technical Soundness
The student has clearly outlined the application architecture of how the operation of the
application would be. This paints a picture of what the application will consist of in terms of
modules and the relationship involved (Clements, 2009). This architectural representation breaks
down the application into small. The fruit recognition application modules outlined is; life cycle
handling, liveData, ViewModelling and Room. These technical terms are well defined. The
relationship and explanation of these components are well defined and this will enable users to
understand easily the operation of the entire application (Clements, 2009).
The use of use case diagram as depicted in the fruit recognition proposal provides a wider picture
of the users interactions with the application (Swafford, 2008). The diagram provides all the
system functionalities that are clear and easy to follow. This approach familiarizes the user with
the system even before it is developed.
These diagrams are related to the solution of the fruit recognition problems stated by the student
and they clearly represent what the solution entails (Fruit recognition application). The use of
these diagrammatic illustrations as seen in the proposal portrays a high degree of creativity in
painting a clear picture of the whole application. Also with the use of the provided references the
proposal provides an overview of what the whole project is all about. The references are related
3

to the proposed application and this ensures that the user has more information regarding the
whole project.
Difficult level of the proposed system
In the proposal some of the graphical user interfaces have been provided showing how the the
application would be. Explanations on the different interfaces shown have been provided
detailing all the activities and interactions involved when navigating through that application
(Leiter, 2015). The green color used on the interfaces relates well with the application. The
GUI’s are consistent throughout even though the text structure is somehow wanting in order to
make it more user friendly. A clear step by step process of operating the application provided,
even though some of the words are more technical and users may not be able to understand. For
example, gamification elements. The structure of the database is represented in the class
diagram even though the diagram is not clear. Therefore a clear class diagram should be
provided. The proposal does not provide a clear internet connection process. This is important
because not every user of this application is aware on how to connect to the internet.
Overall Suggestions
Use of relevant images i.e. fruits on the interfaces.
Provide clear class diagram or use ER diagrams for database illustrations.
Provide a clear step by step explanation of each interface.
Use less technical words.
Improve text visualizations. Avoid crowding of words.
4

Reference
Abbott, A. (2011). A how-to for peer review. A guide surveys the range of practices in Europe
— and offers suggestions for improvement., 1-2.
Clements, P. (2009). Softaware Architecture. Microsoft Application Architecture Guide, 1-5.
Leiter, B. (2015). Importance of Mock ups to designers. Why mockups are useful for designers?,
1-7.
Ludke, K. (2011). Sample Abstract and Peer Review. PG Research Methods CACE11001 (2012-
13), 1-2.
OECD. (2011). ISSUE BRIEF PEER REVIEW. The issue in a nutshell , 1-14.
Swafford, S. (2008). Importance of Use Case. UML Diarams, 1-3.
5