Review Form ABiALS-2002

Reviewer Name: __________

Title: _______________________________________________________________

1. REVIEWER'S STATEMENT:
I am qualified to review this paper, in the sense that I have no direct working interaction or conflict with the author.
__ Yes __ No

2. RELEVANCE TO THIS WORKSHOP:
Is the subject of this paper relevant to this workshop?
__ High __ Medium __ Low

3. SIGNIFICANCE OF THE CONTRIBUTION:
Does the paper bring an important contribution to the subject of this workshop?
___Yes ___No
Comments:

4. CLEAR IDENTIFICATION OF A PROBLEM:
Does the paper have a clearly stated problem to address?
___Yes ___No
Comments:

5. ACHIEVEMENT OF STATED OBJECTIVE:
Does the paper clearly establish its main point (problem, issue, etc.) and stay focused and deliver on this stated objective?
___Yes ___No
Comments:

6. WRITING QUALITY:
How good is the organization, sentence structure, mechanics (e.g. figures, tables), spelling?

7. PEDAGOGY:
Is this paper clear enough to someone who is not specialist of the field described?
___Yes ___No
Comments:

8. REPLICABILITY:
If the paper describes an experiment, is there adequate information in the paper to permit replication of the experiment?
___Yes ___No ____Does not apply

9. BIBLIOGRAPHIC REFERENCES:
Is there anything that needs to be added/corrected/subtracted from the bibliography?
___Yes ___No
What to add/correct/subtract:

10. SUGGESTIONS TO AUTHOR FOR IMPROVING THIS PAPER:
What suggestions would you make to the author to improve this paper (e.g., minor and major errors or omissions, unclear points, etc.) ?

11. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS TO THE AUTHOR:

12. RECOMMENDATION OF PAPER:
Based on your opinion of what should and should not be accepted at the workshop what do you think about acceptance.
__ definitely accept the paper
__ probably accept the paper
__ uncertain
__ probably reject the paper
__ definitely reject the paper

13. CONFIDENCE ABOUT YOUR OPINION:
__ high
__ medium
__ low

14. AMOUNT OF REVISION NEEDED:
___ none
___ little
___ moderate
___ large

15. OPTIONAL REVIEWER IDENTIFICATION:
If you want to sign this review so that the paper's authors see your name, sign your name here. Otherwise, leave this line blank.

16. COMMENTS TO THE EDITORS (not revealed to the authors):