Teaching is structured in the following face-to-face activities:

• Theory classes: Presentations of course contents, with a first part that is devoted to the dissemination of the necessary knowledge for the analysis and the design of cyber-physical systems, and to explain cases that situate in context the knowledge and the abilities that are acquired during the course. The second part will be devoted to the discussion of problems that will be dealt with in the corresponding seminars.
• Problem-solving seminars: Discussion of small case studies (for example, control of a microwave oven) that serve to consolidate theoretical knowledge regarding the analysis and design of cyber-physical systems.
• Laboratory practices: Team work at the laboratory, following a walk-through guide under the supervision of a teacher. Each session will deal with a specific aspect regarding the implementation of cyber-physical systems.

As in all areas of Engineering, the development of embedded systems involves making decisions based on often contradictory criteria. In the case studies, care will be taken to include ethical, social and environmental criteria. Similarly, the ability to adjust them to adapt to incidents in the development process and changes in specifications will be encouraged.

Annotation: within the schedule set by the centre or degree programme, 15 minutes of one class will be reserved for students to evaluate their lecturers and their courses or modules through questionnaires.

a) Procedure and assessment activities’ plan

The assessment is continuous with specific activities (exams and assignments) throughout the course. These assessment activities generate a series of grades that determine the final grade.

The calculation of the final grade n follows the following expression:

n = x·50% + p·25% + c·25%

where x is the grade for the exams; p, that for the laboratory project, and c, that for the continuous assessment.

If x < 5 or p < 5, the final grade n is, at most, a 4.5. In other words, the average of the exams and the project must be passed separately.

The exam grade (x) is the average of the midterm and final exam grades, or the final exam grade alone if it is higher. If the final exam grade is below 3.5, a resit exam must be taken.

Project grade p is obtained from the weighted average of the grades corresponding to each lab session. Six are planned. In case of non-attendance, the absent person will receive a 0 as the grade for the corresponding session.

Continuous assessment grade c is obtained from a weighted average of the problem-solving assignments completed throughout the course. There is no minimum and, therefore, the course can be passed with c = 0 as long as x·50% + p·25% ≥ 5.

b) Assessment activities schedule

The dates of all face-to-face activities, including assessment activities, and submission deadlines will be published on the virtual campus (CV) and may be subject to possible changes in programming for reasons of adaptation to possible incidents: they will always be previously informed through the CV since it is the usual mechanism for exchanging information between teachers and students outside the classroom.

In exceptional cases where the affected person receives approval for the rescheduling request of assessment activities (see “Exam Rescheduling” on the School’s website), an alternative will be offered that fits the course schedule.

c) Re-assessment procedure

In accordance with the coordination of the Degree and the deanship of the School of Engineering, the following activities are not recoverable:

- Project, 25% of the final grade

- Continuous assessment, 25% of the final grade

The average grade of the exams can be recovered with a specific make-up exam.

d) Assessment review procedure

Assessment activities can be reviewed any time after corresponding grades are published and before the deadline for the revision of the final exam.

Should the change of a grade be agreed upon, that grade may not be modified in a later review.

No reviews will be done after the closure of the reviews of the final exam, but for the make-up exam.

e) Grading

A “non-assessable” grade is assigned to students that have not participated in any assessment activity. In any other case, not participating in an assessment activity scores 0 in the weighted average computation.

Honors will be awarded to those who obtain grades greater than or equal to 9.0 in each part, up to 5% of those enrolled in descending order of final grades. They may also be granted in other cases if they do not exceed 5% and the final grade is equal to or greater than 9.0.

f) Irregularities, copies and plagiarism

Copies are evidence that the work or the examination has been done in part or in full without the author's intellectual contribution. This definition also includes attempts to copy in exams and reports, and violations of the norms that ensure intellectual authorship. Plagiarisms refer to the works and texts of other authors that are passed on as their own. They are a crime against intellectual property. To avoid plagiarism, quote the sources you use when writing the corresponding work reports or examinations.

In accordance with the UAB regulations, copies or plagiarisms or any attempt to alter the assessment result, for oneself or for others, like e.g. letting other copy, imply a final grade for the corresponding part (exam, continuous assessment or project) of 0 in the computation of the final score and failing the course. This does not limit the right to act against perpetrators, both in the academic field and in the criminal.

The use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) technologies as an integral part of the development of the work is permitted, provided that the result reflects a significant contribution by the student in the analysis and personal reflection. The student must clearly identify which parts have been generated with this technology, specify the tools used and include a critical reflection on how they have influenced the process and the result of the activity. The lack of transparency in the use of AI is considered a lack of academic honesty and entails a penalty in the grade of the activity, or greater sanctions in serious cases.

g) Assessment of repeaters

There is no differentiated treatment for repeaters, but they can take advantage of their own material from the previous year provided it is informed in the corresponding reports.

h) Single assessment

This course does not have a single assessment procedure.