Qualifying Exam | Doctoral Program - Information Engineering and Computer Science

Qualifying Exam

The goal of the Qualifying exam is twofold. It aims at enabling the advisor and the PhD Programme to assess whether the student has the potential to become a successful PhD candidate. It also gives doctoral students an experience of the “exams” they will face later in their careers.

FIRST EXAM

By October:

PhD students must upload the research proposal complete in all its parts (for details see below) to the students’ web portal according to the instructions provided by the Doctoral Programme Secretariat.
Failure to submit the research proposal will result in a direct FAIL, i.e. failure to pass the Qualifying exam and consequent exclusion from the doctoral programme, unless there are serious and justified reasons for such non-submission, which the Executive Committee reserves the right to evaluate.

Guidelines for drafting a research proposal (paper)
PhD students are required to produce a document of no more than 10 pages in ACM two-column style which must comprise:

  • Contextualization of the research problem identified (why it is important, its impact, etc.)
  • State of the art (concerning the research problem identified)
  • Identification and specification of the research problem addressed by the student’s doctorate, setting it in relation to the current state of research (e.g. specifying existing limitations)
  • Methodology and the approach required to solve the problem identified
  • Any preliminary results 

November–December:

Students will give a presentation of their research proposal to the examination committee. The exam is open to the public and consists of a 20-minute presentation by the student, followed by questions - 25 minutes – from the committee. At the end of the session, the committee discusses the outcome of the exam (PASS / FAIL / RETRY) and provides a written assessment according to the criteria outlined on the evaluation form provided by the student's web portal. The result of the evaluation is made available to the student and his/her advisor.

Evaluation form for examination committee and advisor

The research proposal (paper) and the presentation will be evaluated by the examination committee according to the criteria listed below, using the scale "Insufficient - Sufficient - Good - Excellent": The committee must provide a comment for each criterion, explaining the reasoning behind the assigned judgement.
The advisor is required to provide an evaluation in accordance with the established criteria. The advisor must submit the evaluation grid for his/her student to the portal before his /her student’s examination within the deadlines indicated by the Doctoral Programme Secretariat.

1. Content of the research proposal and presentation (oral exam)

  1. Contextualization, motivation and potential impact of the research problem
  2. State of the art (coverage, quality, good knowledge)
  3. Problem statement and objectives (clarity, depth, novelty, feasibility)
  4. Proposed methodology and expected outcomes (correctness, feasibility, soundness)
  5. Preliminary Results (quality, own contribution)

2. Presentation

  1. Organization, structure, timing, content, visual aspects of the presentation. Language and presentation skills. Quality of the research proposal w.r.t. writing skills

Based on the student's submitted research proposal and of the presentation, the examination committee proposes to the Executive Committee one of the following verdicts. The Executive Committee approves the examination committee’s evaluation. 

PASS 

if the results for criteria b), c) d) and f) were all rated as at least “Sufficient”. The PhD student may continue his/her PhD studies.
FAIL

if at least three of the criteria b), c) d) and f) were rated “Insufficient”. The PhD student will be excluded from the doctoral programme.
RETRY 

if two of the criteria b), c) d) e f) were rated “Insufficient”. The PhD student must submit a new version of his/her research proposal and make a presentation before a different examination committee within 3 months from the day of the notification of the first exam outcome unless justified exceptions which will be assessed individually.

In the event that only one of the criteria b), c), d) or f) is deemed insufficient, the examination committee will evaluate whether to award the student RETRY or a PASS, taking into account the remaining criteria. 

Composition of the examination committee

The examination committee comprises three members. A committee is assigned to each PhD student. In addition to the Doctoral School Committee members, the following individuals will also be involved: adjunct members, members of the Department, and FBK members who are advisors to students on the Doctoral programme.

SECOND EXAM – RETRY

PhD students who have been awarded a RETRY following the first examination are required to submit a revised version of their research proposal and deliver a presentation to a different examination committee within three months of the notification of the first examination outcome. Exceptions to this requirement will be considered on a case-by-case basis.

PhD students must upload the revised version of their research proposal, along with a rebuttal letter, to the students' web portal. The rebuttal letter will refer to the shortcomings identified by the committee of the first exam and list what the PhD student has done to remedy them. The committee will have access to the document via the web portal.

Prior to the second exam (RETRY exam) the advisor must submit an evaluation of the student. The advisor may also make a 10-minute presentation about his/her student before the student’s presentation. The presentation is not public and requires the presence of the student. The committee will also examine the opinion expressed by the committee during the first exam

The RETRY exam is open to the public and consists of a 30-minute presentation: 20 minutes for the presentation and then 10 minutes for the PhD student to respond to the reasons for his/her RETRY given by the previous commission. This is followed by 25 minutes of questions from the committee. At the end of the session, the committee will deliberate on its final vedict on the exam (PASS / FAIL) and will submit it by means of an evaluation form provided by the student’s web portal, so that it is then known to the student and his/her advisor.

Based on the student's submitted research proposal and of the presentation, the examination committee proposes to the Executive Committee one of the following verdicts. The Executive Committee approves the examination committee’s evaluation. 

PASS  if the results for criteria b), c) d) and f) were all rated as at least “Sufficient”. The PhD student may continue his/her PhD studies.
FAIL if at least three of the criteria b), c) d) and f) were rated “Insufficient”. The PhD student will be excluded from the doctoral programme.

Composition of the examination committee:

the Executive Committee is a single committee for all the PhD students. It is composed of at least five members whose requirements are the same as those applied for the committees of the first exam.

EXAM RESULT – FAIL

According to art.13, paragraph 2 of the Regulations of PhD Programme in “Information Engineering and Computer Science” “In the event that a student fails to pass the examination, s/he will be excluded from the PhD Programme from the date decided by the Executive Committee”.