Strengths

• Strong Opening: You led with a clearly articulated vision, which helped set the direction for the presentation.
  
  
• Terminology Alignment: Your effort to define and align on terminology early—especially the reordering for clarity—was well received.
  
  
• Clear Mission Statement: Framing the project’s goal as “client-side phishing protection” gave immediate clarity to the audience.
  
  
• Engaging Delivery: You actively invited audience questions, showing confidence and adaptability.
  
  
• Modeling Approach: You were able to contrast client-side and server-side detection approaches across multiple dimensions, which helped demonstrate system-level thinking.
  
  
• Impact-Oriented: You included some numeric metrics when discussing results, which made the impact more tangible.
  
  

Areas for Improvement

Presentation Structure & Communication

• Please open with your name, current role, company, and time frame of the project to establish credibility and show respect for your audience.
  
  
• Too many “we” or “our” phrases throughout diluted clarity on your personal contributions. Interviewers were unclear on what exactly you owned.
  
  
• Add specificity when stating vague terms like “no comprehensive ground truth”—explain what qualifies as comprehensive and why that’s an issue.
  
  
• Clearly state where the ground truth data came from (e.g., external vendors) to build credibility and close the loop on interviewer questions.
  
  
• Refactor your narrative using a structured storytelling framework:
  
  
  
  • Context / background of the business problem
    
    
  • Challenges and project goals
    
    
  • Quantifiable success metrics
    
    
  • Explored options and decision-making rationale
    
    
  • Architecture, implementation, testing, deployment
    
    
  • Operational ownership: migration, governance, deprecation
    
    
  • Final impact
    
    
  • Key learnings
    
    
  • Future roadmap
    
    

Content Gaps & Depth

• Screenshots on page 3 were not clear—consider zoomed-in visuals or annotations for clarity.
  
  
• On page 4, technical challenges (e.g., “100k images” or “model released every 2 weeks”) didn’t land as convincing difficulties—elaborate on scale, latency requirements, SLAs, or integration overheads.
  
  
• Define technical terms like “TFLite” or “SavedModel” for a generalist audience to ensure clarity.
  
  
• Your strategy comparison on page 6 was confusing—try summarizing with a table and highlighting trade-offs.
  
  
• Summary on page 6 needs a crisper framing; highlight decision points, results, and takeaway.
  
  

System Design Specifics

• On page 5, separate online vs offline components in your system design. This helps interviewers reason about latency, availability, and client/server interaction.
  
  
• When you mentioned elevating alerts from 100k to 300k, clarify the baseline false positive rate. Otherwise, increasing alerts might suggest lower precision.
  
  
• Specify the future evolution of the project and outline the timeline across phases.
  
  
• Revisit your section on technical challenges—as currently phrased, they don’t reflect sufficient complexity or depth expected at your level.

‍