4641/7641 PAPER REVIEW FORM -- COMMENTS FOR THE AUTHOR(S)

Note: You must justify your responses.  Imagine a "Why or why not?"
after each question.

PAPER CODE:   XXXX
PAPER TITLE:  XXXX XXXX XXXX


SUMMARY
   - What is the main result of the paper? (3 sentence limit)
   - Are the result and its presentation convincing? Why or why not?


TECHNICAL EXCELLENCE
   - Is the paper technically strong?
   - Is the result significant?
   - Is the paper technically sound?
   - Does the paper reference appropriate past work?
   - Is the paper commensurate with a semester's worth of work?  
     (Factor in other classes and commitments, etc.)


RELEVANCE, IMPORTANCE and ORIGINALITY
   - Is the problem interesting?
   - Is the approach well-motivated?
   - Is the paper original?
   - Is the paper a significant contribution to the field of ML?  

Does the paper belong to one of the following categories?  If yes,
briefly explain how; if not, define a new category (justify your
choice, of course) and explain how the paper fits into your new
category:

   - New synthesis that brings subfields of ML together,
   - Scaling studies (theory to support scaling, experimental study of
     scaling, bringing ML out of the laboratory),
   - ML contributions to other disciplines,
   - Physical realizations of ML systems?


CLARITY
   - Is the paper clearly written?  How or how not?
   - Does it motivate the research?  How or how not?


OTHER COMMENTS FOR THE AUTHOR(S):

<Your comments here>



YOUR RECOMMENDATION: 

	ACCEPT ____ 
	MARGINAL _____ 
	REJECT _____


YOUR EXPERTISE ON THE TOPIC OF THE PAPER: 

	HIGH _____ 
	MEDIUM ____ 
	LOW ______


YOUR CONFIDENCE IN YOUR RECOMMENDATION: 

	HIGH _____ 
	MEDIUM ____ 
	LOW _____


COMMENTS TO THE SPC AND PROGRAM CHAIRS (reasons to accept or
reject):


SHOULD THIS PAPER BE NOMINATED AS AN OUTSTANDING PAPER? ______

WHY?