Teacher: In this task, you are given books product reviews in English language. The goal is to classify the review as "POS" if the overall sentiment of the review is positive or as "NEG" if the overall sentiment of the review is negative.
Teacher: Now, understand the problem? If you are still confused, see the following example:
Hopeful for those who seek harmony in the world . I wouldn't recommend this to anyone who thinks that religious wars, repression of individual spirits or rape of the earth are good things. Those who seek peace, harmony, celebration of each of us and respect for our earth will find this hopeful
Solution: POS
Reason: The overall sentiment of the review is positive as the reviewer mentions positive expressions such as 'hopeful', 'will find this helpful' etc.. Hence, the label is 'POS'.

Now, solve this instance: GREAT overview-awful editing & proofreading . As previous reviewers have commented, this is a very good overview of the CMMI. The authors work in the industry, and have done an admirable job presenting the nuts-and-bolts of this enormous topic in a straightforward fashion. But if you intend to use it as a tool, like you would Paulk's book on the SW-CMM (SM), DON'T BUY IT YET. The editing in Appendix B renders this book useless to me (I need it as a tool). When I compare the constituents of the Process Areas in Appendix B to the CMMI (CMU/SEI-2000-TR-018), there is erroneous duplication. E.g., "Commitment" in PMC reads exactly like "Commitment" in Requirements Management PA (it shouldn't !). Ditto for Co in SAM, Co in MA, and the subsequent Maturity Level 2 Process Area commitments. The same erroneous cut-and-paste was made for the Abilities, DI, etc. The Level 3 PAs have the similar problem, erroneous cut-and-pastes from the RD template. I cannot use this book as I'd intended because of these errors, so I have to lug around the large heavy SEI tech reports instead
Student:
NEG