Guidelines for Paper Review
- Paper description:
- describe the summary and list key (most essential) ideas
- what were the main contributions ?
- What are the most important reasons to accept the paper [when you review for a conference/ journal] or why you like this work ?
- What are the most important reasons to reject the paper [when you review for a conference/ journal] or why you dislike this work ?
- has serious technical mistakes (describe them)
- isn't novel (provide/suggest related work/papers)
- doesn't demonstrate (all) its point by proofs, simulations, experiments (be specific)
- makes unreasonalbe assumptions (describe them)
- Detailed comments on the paper
- what did you learn reading the paper ?
- what are the technical things that you appreciated ?
- Comments on their references & related work:
- how does the paper relate with other works/projects/papers ?
- which of them have been cited and which you know that are related by they have not been referenced by the authors
- Comment its presentation style:
- does the paper describe clearly its goals ?
- did the paper deliver what originally promised ?
- what were the motivations (what issues/problems inspired this research), assumptions (of the setting, requirements), contributions ?
- is the bibliography format/list of keywords complete ?
- Are the figures readable ? Can you see the trend ? Do they explain the trend or "strange behaviour" ? Do the results in the figures make sense ? If not, mention it in the review. Raise questions...
- list any writing style remarks/corrections (english grammar/syntax, spelling) ...
- Make concrete suggestions for how to improve the paper:
- Do you have any unanswered questions on the paper ?
Possible reasons:
list your recommendations. Be constructive and clear.