ECAI Extended Abstract REVIEW FORM

Reviewer and Paper Information
Name of Reviewer
Paper Title and Code
Reviewer's Knowledge of Topic
(please highlight appropriate box) / Average / Good / Excellent
Program Topic Category (see bellowed list)

Topic Categories:

Electronic circuits and equipments, Software and computer applications, Data bases, Expert systems, Communications, Microwaves - techniques and technologies & EMC, Signal Processing, Educational multimedia applications, Artificial Intelligence, Bio-medical applications, Environmental issues

Paper Assessment

Please use the scoring system below to evaluate the paper in the following categories.

Paper Assessment Criteria / Score(0 to 5)
1 / Originality of paper.
(In your opinion, the likelihood of any aspects of this paper making useful contributions to aninternational journal paper is……)
2 / Technical quality of abstract/paper.
(In your opinion, the degree to which the material presented has been approached in a solid,thorough, research like manner, backed up with quantitative analysis and conclusions is….)
3 / References.
(The level to which the author has provided references that are relevant to the topic,contemporary and cover most of the significant contributions made, by others to this field ofstudy is…..)
4 / Presentation style.
(The presentation style, including logical information flow, paper structure, readability andcorrect use of English is…..); The ECAI template style is not mandatory for the ECAI extended abstract;
5 / Program topic
(The degree to which this paper fits within the program topic to which it has been allocatedis….)

Score - Paper Assessment Score Text

0 - Unable to judge; 1- Poor; 2 - Below Average; 3 - Average; 4 - Good; 5 - Very Good.

Reviewer Rating

Please use the table below to give an overall rating on the paper.

Reviewer Overall Opinion
Please give a score to the paper based on the paper rating scheme given below.
Paper Rating
Score / Paper Rating Score Description
0, 1 / Reject
(This paper should not be presented at this conference irrespective of other reviewers’ opinions.There are technical and/or presentation issues that make this paper unacceptable. Mandatory only if the Reviewer's Knowledge of Topic is Excellent)
2 / Weak Reject
(If it were solely up to you, you would reject this paper but would not object to this paper being
accepted if other reviewers are of the opinion that it holds some merit)
3 / Weak Accept
(If it were solely up to you, you would accept this paper but you would not object to this paper beingrejected if other reviewers are of the opinion that there is no merit in accepting it for presentation atthis conference.)
4, 5 / Accept
(This paper should be presented at this conference irrespective of other reviewers’ opinions. It is asound piece of work that is well presented and should be well received at this conference. Mandatory only if the Reviewer's Knowledge of Topic is Excellent)

If the paper has been rejected (is obligatory) or the paper must be improved, please supply a comment or statement that would help the author to improvethe level of the paper for final paper or future ECAI submissions. Please note that comments should be suitable forsubmission to the authors.

To be sent before 25.04.09back to:

We will be grateful to all those who will send us their comments and suggestions in order to improve our publication policy, and the refereeing procedure.