This week, we received feedback on our report, which was overall positive. However, one key criticism was that the clarity of our project, as presented, was not fully reflected in the written report. A particularly useful piece of feedback highlighted the importance of ensuring that our paper stands as a strong argument on its own, without raising unnecessary questions or criticisms. This means we need to be more precise in our wording to avoid ambiguity. On a personal note, I did not receive much criticism on the sections I worked on, which was reassuring.
In addition to the report, we worked on our ethics assignment, which encouraged us to think more deeply about the potential consequences of our project. One key concern we discussed was that if our Sudoku solver became too popular, it could lead to people becoming overly reliant on digital solvers and less engaged with traditional puzzle-solving methods. This assignment was a great opportunity to reflect on the broader ethical implications of our work and consider how technological convenience can sometimes have unintended consequences.
On the technical side, we made significant progress in assembling the projector and board setup. Winstone completed a version of the 9×9 grid with a cursor and possible inputs, which we projected onto the board. We had discussions about how to properly align the projection with the physical board to ensure smooth interaction. Meanwhile, I worked on implementing additional features, including an automatic Sudoku solver and a random puzzle generator. These features will further enhance the usability of our system and bring us closer to a fully functional prototype.