Comprehensive examination - New Program
Important information
A new structure for the PhD program in Computer Science (3-175-1-0) will take effect in Fall 2025.
Students admitted under the previous structure (i.e., those who began their studies before the fall of 2025) should follow the guidelines corresponding to the previous structure that can be found here.
The sections below provide general guidelines regarding the doctoral comprehensive examination, often referred to as the “predoc”.
PhD students in computer science are expected to master their area of specialization. To achieve this objective, they must pass a comprehensive examination in two parts. Both parts must be completed no later than the end of the 6th term of study, failing to meet this requirement will result in exclusion from the program. A one-term extension may be granted upon presentation of a valid justification, in accordance with the graduate and postdoctoral studies academic regulations.
A PhD student who is required, at the time of admission, to take one or both of the courses IFT2015 and IFT2125 must register for them in the first term of study. For Parts 1 and 2 of the predoc, the student may register in any term during their first six terms of study. However, the student must consult their supervisor to plan their academic path, including courses, which must also be completed no later than the end of the 6th term of study.
Students are encouraged to contact the professors responsible for each examination part or the predoctoral committee if they have any questions. Both the professors and the committee are always available to help students succeed
Part 1 : Validation of the knowledge of the specialty domain.
Procedure
The examination to assess the student's level of knowledge synthesis in their specialty area is conducted as an oral exam following the submission of a written report. The exam is offered in all three terms each year. The candidate's supervisor is responsible for expediting the completion of this stage..
Before taking this first part of the predoc examination, the student must have successfully completed the graduate courses required by their PhD program.
Schedule
The schedule indicates the deadlines for the different steps required to complete predoc 1 within a given term.
| End of the 3rd week of the term | Deadline to submit the intent to present (student, with supervisor in cc). |
| Between the 3rd and 7th week of the term | Appointment of the doctoral committee. It is recommended to set a preliminary date for the oral exam. |
| End of the 7th week of the term | Deadline to submit the corpus proposal to the committee (student, with supervisor in cc). |
| No later than one week after the submission of the corpus porposal | Deadline for the doctoral committee to validate the proposal (committee). |
| Two weeks before the oral exam | Submission of the synthesis report to the committee (student). |
| Minimum one week before the end of the term | Oral exam. |
| Before the end of the term or no later than one week after the oral exam | Submission of the evaluation form to the TGDE (chair of the committee). |
Detailed process according to the schedule above
The process is initiated by the student, who sends the chair of the predoc committee (Emma Frejinger) an email (with their supervisor and the TGDE in copy) stating their intention to present predoc 1. The notice of intent must include the student’s research field in the form of a title, as well as suggestions for a chair and a member for the doctoral committee. It is recommended to contact the proposed candidates before sending the notice of intent. The chair of the predoc committee sends an email to the student and all members of their doctoral committee to officially confirm the committee’s formation.
In consultation with their supervisor, the student may begin preparing a corpus proposal to be submitted to their doctoral committee for approval. The doctoral committee reviews the proposal, and the committee chair is responsible for setting a date for the oral exam. See the schedule for the deadlines associated with these steps.
Once approved, the student prepares a synthesis report on the selected corpus of articles. This report must be submitted no later than two weeks before the date of the oral exam. There is no need to inform the chair of the predoc committee or the TGDE of the exchanges between the student and the committee regarding the corpus or the synthesis report.
During the oral exam, the student presents a synthesis of the literature they have analyzed to their doctoral committee. This is followed by a question-and-answer session with the committee.
At the end of the oral exam, the committee deliberates and assigns a grade (pass or fail) to the student. The chair communicates the committee’s report to the TGDE for graduate studies and to the chair of the predoc committee
In the event of a failure, the committee’s report must specify the reasons for the failure as well as clear expectations for the exam retake. The student must retake the exam on the date specified in the committee’s report, no later than the following term. A second failure results in the student’s dismissal from the program
Doctoral Committee
The student’s doctoral committee is appointed by the chair of the predoc committee. The committee is composed of the supervisor, one or more co-supervisors if applicable, a member, and a chair. The committee chair must be a professor in DIRO (excluding adjunct professors). Committee members, other than the supervisors, should not have a conflict of interest with the student (for example, a member cannot be a co-author of work that is part of the thesis). To ensure continuity, it is recommended to keep the same committee for both predoc 1 and predoc 2.
Corpus Proposal
After consulting with their supervisor, the student submits to the doctoral committee the material for the examination:
- A title defining the scope of the research field.
- A 250–300 word summary of the research field.
- A corpus of 5 to 10 articles to be studied. Eligible material includes any scientific manuscript published in a reputable journal or conference proceedings, or any book chapter. In addition, eligible articles should be at least 8 pages in length in the publication format.
Approval of the Proposal
The doctoral committee must approve the corpus proposal. If deemed appropriate, the committee may require changes to the selected corpus of articles. These changes are considered final. In its response, the committee also communicates the location, date, and time of the student’s oral exam. The oral exam may be conducted in person or remotely, at the committee’s discretion.
Synthesis Report
The student must submit a 10-page report (NSERC format) reviewing the literature corresponding to the summary and the corpus of articles. The bibliography, title, and summary are not included in the page count. Figures, code excerpts, algorithms, or summary tables may be included in an appendix and are not counted toward the page limit. The student may consult their supervisor for guidance in writing the report. Several resources are also available. See, for example, https://www.uk.sagepub.com/books/Book236719.
Oral Exam
The oral exam consists of three parts:
- Presentation: The student presents a critical synthesis of the corpus they have analyzed. The presentation lasts 10 to 20 minutes. The student is evaluated on their ability to synthesize the literature relevant to their research field.
- Question-Answer: The committee has approximately 30 to 60 minutes to ask the student questions. Committee members ask their questions in the order agreed upon by the chair. Questions cover the student’s corpus of articles as well as any related knowledge.
- Committee Report: The committee deliberates in private and assigns a grade (pass or fail) for the exam in its report. The evaluation is based on both the synthesis report and the oral exam.
Failure
If the exam is failed, it must be retaken on the date specified in the doctoral committee’s report, no later than the end of the following term. According to the instructions in the doctoral committee’s report, the retake may include only the oral part or both the written and oral parts. If the student fails the retake, they are dismissed from the program.
Part 2 : Presentation of the student's research topic
This last part of the examination is an oral presentation of the student’s research subject. In addition to the oral presentation, the student must submit a manuscript describing the research topic, containing a substantive bibliography, and describing the different research directions.
Thesis topic presentation
This part aims to verify that the student has defined their thesis topic, has a solid understanding of their research field, and already has promising ideas that will enable them to successfully complete their program within a reasonable timeframe. The committee does not view the presentation as a contract to be fulfilled, but rather as an outline of research avenues that may lead to the advancement of computer science.
The examination is individualized, meaning that a committee is formed for each student. The committee is composed of the supervisor or co-supervisors and two other professors (a chair and a member). The committee chair must be a professor in DIRO (excluding adjunct professors). Committee members, other than the supervisors, should not have a conflict of interest with the student (for example, a member cannot be a co-author of work that is part of the thesis). To ensure continuity, it is recommended to keep the same committee as for predoc 1. If the committee is not the same as for predoc 1, the student, with the approval of their supervisor, must request the formation of a new committee from the chair of the department’s predoc committee.
The exam consists of an oral presentation and a written report, which must be submitted to the committee members at least one week before the scheduled presentation date. If, upon reviewing the document, the committee does not believe that the candidate is ready to give their presentation, it may either postpone the presentation date and require a revised version of the report or decide that the student has failed.
The committee chair organizes the presentation, to which all department members are invited. Traditionally, such a presentation is given as part of the seminar series of the laboratory where the student works, but this is not mandatory.
The exact content of the report and the presentation is determined by the student in collaboration with their supervisor. However, as a suggestion, we provide here a few points that could be included.
Report
The student must, in a report of about 30 to 40 pages, present their research topic. It is important that the report demonstrates the student’s knowledge of the field, with a comprehensive bibliographic review identifying the relevance of the research topic and establishing relations with the chosen subject. In short, the report should convince the jury that the subject is valuable and promising and that the candidate is capable of obtaining tangible results within a reasonable timeframe. The report should also contain a realistic timeline.
Oral Presentation
Lasting approximately 45 minutes, this presentation covers the key points of the report, with a focus on the precise statement of the thesis topic and establishing the necessary connections between the main works in the field. Out of respect for audience members who are not part of the committee, the presentation should not assume prior reading of the report, which serves primarily to support the claims made during the oral presentation.
At the end of the presentation, after questions from the committee members and the audience, the committee members decide whether or not the student has passed this second part of the predoc examination and communicate their decision to academic administration. In the event of a failure, the committee’s report must specify the reasons for the failure as well as clear expectations for the exam retake. The student must retake the exam on the date specified in the committee’s report, no later than six months after the failure. A second failure results in the student’s dismissal from the program. The committee chair must submit the evaluation form to the TGDE no later than one week after the exam.