CMSC 601 LITERATURE SURVEY REVIEW FORM Adapted from ICML-03 review form AUTHOR'S NAME: TITLE OF SURVEY: REVIEWER'S NAME: -------------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY. Please summarize the area of this survey in one sentence. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------------- OVERALL. Give an overall rating of the paper (mark with an X), and a one- to three-sentence summary of why you gave it that rating. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- (E) Excellent [ ] (VG) Very Good [ ] (G) Good [ ] (F) Fair [ ] (P) Poor [ ] -------------------------------------------------------------------------- MOTIVATION. Does the survey state the key problems in the field, and why these problems are important and interesting to researchers? -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------------- THOROUGHNESS. Does the survey (appear to) do a thorough job at surveying work in the problem area (both directly and indirectly related)? -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------------- ORGANIZATION. Is the survey well organized, to help the reader identify broad themes, research directions, and key papers/authors? -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------------- DESCRIPTION. Are the descriptions of existing techniques given at an appropriate level of detail? Can a reader not familiar with the area follow the explanations? Are the contributions of previous work clearly stated? -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------------- ANALYSIS. Does the survey clearly articulate the key strengths and weaknesses of existing methods? Are directions for future research discussed? -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------------- PRESENTATION. Is the paper well written? Is terminology and jargon clearly explained for a non-expert reader? Has the author provided sufficient background on any necessary formalisms or methods? --------------------------------------------------------------------------