Breaking Results and Informal Presentations

Reviewers will use this form to document and communicate their evaluation of
your Late Breaking submission. By reviewing this form, you can see the
types of things reviewers consider when reading your submission.

               CHI 97 Late Breaking Results Review Form

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Submission NUMBER ::
Submission TITLE (shorten to taste)::

Submission type:  POSTER or SHORT PAPER

AUTHOR(S) ::

REVIEWER NUMBER ::

BRIEF SUMMARY OF THE MAIN POINTS :

OVERALL RATING:
( 1= definitely accept
  2= probably accept
  3 = could go either way
  4 = probably reject
  5 = definitely reject )

REVIEWER'S EXPERTISE
Rate your expertise in the area addressed by the poster
 (1 = extremely confident, I consider myself an expert;
  2 = pretty confident, I know this area well;
  3 = moderately confident, I know as much as most;
  4 = rather unconfident, but I know a bit;
  5 = very unconfident, really just a guess):

DETAILED RATINGS:
(include comments where appropriate)

1. Originality and Innovativeness of work:
(1 = highly original and innovative;
 5 = no or minimal original content)
 
 comment:  

2. Clarity of goals :
(1 = clearly stated;
 5 = topic of work not clear at all)
 
 comment:

3. Clarity of methods:
(1 = clearly stated;
 5 = method not clear at all)
 
 comment:

4. Clarity of results:
(1 = clearly stated;
 5 = results not clear at all)
 
 comment:

5. Credibility of interpretation of results:
(1 = results are very credible;
 5 = results are not credible or unsupported)
 
 comment:

6. Importance of work:
(1 = generates may ideas about new research topics, very high practical
     relevance, fills an important need;
 5 = nobody will need this)
 
 comment:

7. Quality of writing:
(1 = clear writing, easy to understand;
 5 = unclear writing, impossible to follow)
 
 comment:

IF THE PRESENTATION TYPE IS A POSTER, ANSWER # 8
8. Visual quality of the poster:
(1 = very good visual quality;
5 = nobody will be attracted by the visual quality)

comment:
 
COMMENTS FOR THE AUTHOR(S)
Provide any other comments you believe would be useful to the
author (including pointers to missing relevant work):

COMMENTS FOR THE REVIEW COMMITTEE
Use this space to provide comments that you feel are relevant to
the review process but that you do NOT want forwarded to the
author(s):

----------------------------------------------------------------------------