Assessment of an IT-related extended abstract For an assignment at our university it was our task to program a prototyp and document it in an extended abstract.

Intro text: The Idea is to create a system, which allows data exchange (contacts, Images, videos) via Bluetooth based on a QR Code and/or NFC triggered action. Code Exchange would not be necessary.

Due to the last sentence we assumed that we did not have to publish the source code.

We put much work in to our prototype and the abstract and did not receive the grade we were wishing for. The feedback: "Abstract documents the app only and no source code was provided."

We do not care very much for the grade itself, but what makes this really unfair is that another group with a similar assignment received a better grade despite their abstract not citing any scientific papers.

Therefore we have the following questions:

How would you interpret "code exchange not necessary"?

Is it customary/obligatory to publish the source code for prototypes in academic papers/abstracts?

Are scientific paper references not a requirement for an extended abstract and by some degree an indicator of the quality of the paper?

How would you assess the abstract in terms of project execution, accurracy, tracability?

Thank you for any input.

Edit: Removed links due to the actual documents not being relevant.
Is it customary/obligatory to publish the source code for prototypes in academic papers/abstracts?


No. Most academic articles (in IT) do not include the code. Some rarely do have a link to a link where the code and source materials can be downloaded. 


  Are scientific paper references not a requirement for an extended abstract and by some degree an indicator of the quality of the paper?


It depends on the reviewer. Some would look at the number of studies referenced to make sure that sufficient background research and literature was conducted (been through that one). Some may look closely at the quality of the references (although I haven't experienced this sort myself). Some only expect the relevant concepts too be attributed, even if only 3 or 4 items are referenced. 


  How would you assess the abstract in terms of project execution, accurracy, tracability?


If the underlying novelty is focused so as to improve performance of an existing system, then a simple line about the increase in performance metric/accuracy with respect to the state id thee art will do. Statisticians are not to find of bare accuracy. There are many other measures for This, but a simple mean+_std. dev. ought to be a better alternative. 

If the novelty lies in the application itself and not any performance measure, then this'd line would not be necessary. I'm not sure how the traceability aspect would come in an abstract. 


  How would you interpret "code exchange not necessary"?


Sorry, but that's a question for your instructor.