INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF INTELLIGENT COMPUTING AND APPLIED SCIENCES

REFEREE’S REPORT

NOTICE: Reviewers are encouraged to read the "Guidelines for Reviewers of theIJICAS" on the Web ().

Paper Number:

Paper Title:

Author(s):

Name of Editorial Board Member:

Name of Reviewer (if different from EB member):

Date Sent:

Date to be Returned (preferably by e-mail):

RATINGS OF PAPER

[Please check the following appropriate boxes by entering a score between -3 to 3with 0 being the average based on the following guidelines:

3: Strong Accept (As good as any top paper in reputable journals)

2: Accept (Comparable to good papers in reputable journals)

1: Weak Accept (I vote acceptance, but won't argue for it)

0: Neutral (I don't like it, but I won't object if others like it)

-1: Weak Reject (I would rather not see this paper accepted)

-2: Reject (I would argue to reject this paper)

-3: Strong Reject (Definitely detrimental to the journal quality if accepted)]

Relevance to IJICC:

- Is the paper topic on theIJICAStopic list? yes no

- Does the paper cite severalIJICAS papers? yes no

- Does it relate to otherIJICAS papers you may have read? yes no

OVERALL RECOMMENDATION (please check appropriate boxes)

ACCEPT - with any possible minor changes, as stated overleaf

REVISE AND ACCEPT - subject to limited specific changes requiring a re-examination by the EB member only

REVISE AND RESUBMIT - May contain publishable results. Requires rewriting, resubmission, and re-review of revised manuscript.

Please check if you wish to see the revision

REJECT AND DO NOT ENCOURAGE RESUBMISSION

Paper is so poorly written that the contribution, if any, is obscure
Insufficient new material, see references listed in the review.
Results are not correct, and there is no obvious way to correct them.
Paper is not suitable for the Journal for reasons given in the review

COMMENTS TO BE CONVEYED TO THE AUTHORS (Please do NOT identify yourself)

(Please enter your comments for the author(s) giving your reasons foraccepting or rejecting the paper by considering the following suggested points: (1) main contributions; (2) positive aspects; and (3) negative aspects. In particular, you are encouraged tosubstantiate negative comments. If you claim that the work is not original, please give specific references to the earlier allegedly similar work.)

COMMENTS FOR EDITORIAL STAFF (These will not be sent to the author(s), as many lines as you like)

*** Confidential***

Date:………………… Signed:…………………………

Referee Number: