CS2640 Modern Storage Systems
Paper Discussion

Paper Discussion Preparations

Half of this course is paper discussion. Each student is required to present one paper during the semester. While we do not ask everyone to write a formal report on the paper, we do expect you to read the paper and think through it carefully. This applies to everyone in the class, not only the presenter, who will also make slides to present the paper and lead the discussion.

Questions to consider when reading each paper:

  • What is the main problem the paper is trying to solve?
  • Why is this problem important?
  • What is the key idea or innovation proposed by the authors?
  • What is the tradeoff or limitation of the proposed solution?
  • Are the experiments and evaluations convincing? Why or why not?
  • How does the proposed solution compare to previous work?
  • What are the strengths and weaknesses of the paper?
  • What are the potential future directions or open questions raised by the paper?

Reflecting on these questions will help you understand the paper more deeply and prepare you for a thoughtful presentation and discussion.

Class Structure

Each class we will discuss two papers, and will be structured as follows:

Instructor gives a brief context.
First presentation.
Open discussion.
Second presentation.
Open discussion.

For Presenters

Your presentation should be ~20 minutes. Here is a suggested slide structure:

1. Background & Motivation

Set the stage so the audience understands why this work matters.
  • What is the problem? Why is it hard or important?
  • What is the state of the art before this paper?
  • What gap or limitation does this paper address?

2. Key Idea & Design

Explain the core contribution clearly. Use diagrams.
  • What is the key insight or technique?
  • How does the system/algorithm work? Walk through the architecture or workflow
  • What are the important design decisions and tradeoffs?
Tip: Reuse or redraw the paper's figures rather than describing them in text. A good diagram is worth many slides.

3. Evaluation

Summarize the key results. Be critical.
  • What are the main experiments and baselines?
  • Highlight 2-3 key results (don't show every graph)
  • Are the results convincing? What is missing?

4. Discussion & Takeaways

Wrap up and seed the class discussion.
  • Strengths and weaknesses of the paper
  • Open questions or future directions
  • Prepare a few discussion questions for the class

Presentation Rubric

Presentations are graded on the following criteria (100 points total).

Criterion Excellent (90-100%) Good (75-89%) Adequate (60-74%) Needs Improvement (<60%) Weight
Content & Understanding Demonstrates deep understanding of the problem, approach, and contributions; clearly explains technical details Solid understanding of the paper; minor gaps in technical depth Covers the main points but misses important details or shows surface-level understanding Significant misunderstandings or major omissions 25%
Slide Quality & Delivery Well-organized slides with effective figures; clear, confident delivery; good pacing within time limit Good slides and delivery; minor issues with organization, pacing, or clarity Slides are text-heavy or disorganized; delivery is unclear or significantly over/under time Poorly prepared slides; hard to follow; major time issues 25%
Critical Analysis Identifies key strengths and weaknesses; offers thoughtful evaluation of methodology and results Provides reasonable critique but lacks depth in some areas Minimal critical analysis; mostly summarizes without evaluating No critical perspective; pure summary of the paper 25%
Discussion Leadership Prepares thought-provoking questions; engages the class effectively; handles audience questions well Asks reasonable questions; some audience engagement Few or superficial discussion questions; limited engagement No prepared questions; unable to lead discussion 25%

For the Audience

Active participation makes the discussion valuable for everyone.

How to participate effectively:

  • Read the paper before class — at least Pass 1 and Pass 2 (see below)
  • Take notes — jot down questions and points of confusion as you read
  • Ask questions — there are no bad questions; if you are confused, others likely are too
  • Share your perspective — relate the paper to your own experience or other work you know
  • Be constructive — critique ideas, not people; suggest improvements, not just problems

Effective Paper Reading Strategy

Follow this three-pass approach to efficiently read and understand research papers:

Pass 1 (10–30 min): Triage and Mental Map

Decide whether to invest more time and get the paper's shape.

Do:

  • Read title + abstract, then intro (lightly)
  • Skim section headings, diagrams, and key math blocks
  • Read conclusion and quickly scan references

Outcome:

  • Answer: What problem? What contribution? Rough approach?
  • Decide: stop, bookmark, or continue (not needed for the papers you will read for this class)
💡 Tip: Prioritize figures/tables—they encode methods and results directly

Pass 2 (1–2 hrs): Understand & Evaluate

Understand the "how" and "why" without getting stuck in details.

Identify:

  • Problem definition (inputs/outputs, constraints, models)
  • Key idea (the trick, abstraction)
  • Method/architecture/algorithm (restate-able level)
  • Assumptions (explicit and implicit)
  • Evaluation design (metrics, baselines, datasets, ablations)

Outcome:

  • Write 5–8 sentence summary + strengths/weaknesses
  • Know which parts to revisit for reproduction/extension

Pass 3 (Deep Dive): Re-derive & Stress-test

Be able to use the paper (re-implement, extend, review).

Do:

  • Re-derive key steps; work through proofs/invariants
  • Check experimental reproducibility
  • Audit hidden assumptions and edge cases
  • Compare to relevant prior work

Outcome:

  • Explain what they did, why it works, when it fails, next steps

Additional Resources: