1 / 9

CMPUT603 - Fall 2005

CMPUT603 - Fall 2005. Topic2: Refereeing (After Alan J. Smith, “The Task of the Referee”, IEEE Computer, April, 1989, pp. 65-71.) José Nelson Amaral et al. http://www.cs.ualberta.ca/~c603. Role of the Referee. What is the role of the referee? For an acceptance recommendation:

clover
Download Presentation

CMPUT603 - Fall 2005

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. CMPUT603 - Fall 2005 Topic2: Refereeing (After Alan J. Smith, “The Task of the Referee”, IEEE Computer, April, 1989, pp. 65-71.) José Nelson Amaral et al. http://www.cs.ualberta.ca/~c603 CMPUT 603 - Teaching and Research Methods

  2. Role of the Referee • What is the role of the referee? • For an acceptance recommendation: • Is the referee responsible for the correctness of the paper? • For a rejection: • What should be the goal of the report? • Does the quality of the report affect the referee reputation? How? CMPUT 603 - Teaching and Research Methods

  3. Referee Report Structure • Summarize your recommendation • Summarize the point of the paper • Evaluate the significance of the research • Evaluate the quality of the research • Methodology, techniques, accuracy, presentation • Overall recommendation • On a rejection, clearly state the reasons • Make the strength of your opinion clear • On acceptance, list required and suggested changes. CMPUT 603 - Teaching and Research Methods

  4. Evaluation of a Research Paper • What is the purpose of the paper? • Is the paper appropriate? • Is the goal significant? • Is the method of approach valid? • Is the execution of the research correct? • Are the conclusions supported by the data? • Is the presentation satisfactory? • What did you learn? CMPUT 603 - Teaching and Research Methods

  5. Evaluation of a Research Paper (categories) • Major results • Good, solid, interesting work • Minor, but positive, contribution to knowledge • Elegant and technically correct but useless • Neither elegant nor useful, but not wrong • Wrong and misleading • So badly written that technical evaluation is impossible CMPUT 603 - Teaching and Research Methods

  6. Comparative Evaluation • What are the standards of this journal or conference? • If you recommend a revision (minor or major), will you see the paper again? • If you do, what should you check for? CMPUT 603 - Teaching and Research Methods

  7. Evaluating a Tutorial • Are the title and abstract adequate? • Is the scope too wide, too narrow, too bizarre? • Does the paper have a consistent theme? • Is the material correct? • Is the coverage too simple or too sophisticated? • Is the paper well-written and clear? CMPUT 603 - Teaching and Research Methods

  8. Evaluating a Survey • Is the author an expert in the field? • Is the material integrated in a consistent manner? (Annotated bibliographies are not interesting) • Is the coverage balanced and thorough? • Is all the important literature cited? • Is the presentation biased, slanted, selective? CMPUT 603 - Teaching and Research Methods

  9. Other Important Issues • Simultaneous submissions, prior publication, and unrevised retries • Acknowledgments and plagiarism • Timely response and returning a paper • The author’s reputation • Confidentiality • Conflicts of interest • The editor’s role • The program chair’s role CMPUT 603 - Teaching and Research Methods

More Related