The program outputs:

"Allen, Martin" 1 1/2 1 1 1 0 0 0 0.000 [[0.000]]
"Barr, Andrew" 1 1 1 1 1 2/3 1 3/4 1.000 [[3.900]]
"Deines, Aly" 1 1/2 1 1 1 0 0 0 1.000 [[2.700]]
"Gaski, Joanna" 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1.000 [[3.500]]
"Ohana, Andrew" 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0.000 [[1.400]]
"Pfeiffer, James" 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0.975 [[4.000]]
"Spicer, Simon" 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1.000 [[4.000]]
"Swierczewski, Chris" 1 1/2 1 1 1 1 1 0 1.000 [[3.800]]
"Webb, Zak" 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.000 [[0.000]]


My decision is:

Barr, Andrew     3.9
Deines, Aly      3.9
Gaski, Joanna    3.9
Ohana, Andrew    Incomplete
Pfeiffer, James  4.0
Spicer, Simon    4.0
Swierczewski, Chris  4.0


Why?   (1) Andrew Barr learned a lot and tried incredibly hard. 
(2) It is a topics course, and very experimental. 
(3) It's unfair to knock Chris down, given that the entire point loss is on homework 2.
(4) Andrew, Aly, and Joanna all had somewhat lackluster homework.