 |
|
|
1. Briefly describe the paper and its contribution to
computer graphics and interactive techniques. Please
give your assessment of the scope and magnitude of
the paper's contribution.
2. Is the exposition clear? How could it be improved?
3. Are the references adequate? List any additional
references that are needed.
4. Could the work be reproduced by one or more skilled graduate
students? Are all important algorithmic or system
details discussed adequately? Are the limitations
and drawbacks of the work clear?
5. Please rate this paper on a continuous scale
from 1 to 5, where: 1 = Reject, 2 = Doubtful,
3 = Possibly accept, 4 = Probably accept, 5 = Accept.
Please base your rating on the paper as it was
submitted.
6. Please rate your expertise in the subject area of
the paper on a continuous scale from 1 to 3, where:
1 = Tyro, 2 = Journeyman, 3 = Expert.
7. Explain your rating by discussing the strengths and
weaknesses of the submission. Include suggestions for
improvement and publication alternatives, if appropriate.
Be thorough -- your explanation will be of highest importance for any committee
discussion of the paper and will be used by the authors
to improve their work. Be fair -- the authors spent a lot of effort to prepare their submission, and your evaluation will be forwarded to them during the rebuttal period.
8. List here any questions that you want answered
by the author(s) during the rebuttal period.
9. You may enter private comments for the papers
committee here. These comments will not be sent to
the paper author(s).
|
|
|
|
