Home
About
About MoNeTec
Past Conferences
Conference Sponsors
Conference Organizers
Program
Committees
Program Committee
Organizing Committee
Contacts
For Authors
Topics
Call for Papers
Paper Submission Instructions
Important Dates for Authors
Call for Posters
Student Conference Grants
Registration
Registration Fees
MoNeTec-2026 Registration
Tutorials
MoNeTec-2026 Tutorials
Registration for Tutorials
Contacts
Review Form for PC Members
Paper ID:
Paper Title:
Reviewer’s Name:
1. Content Quality Questions:
1.1 Does the introduction provide sufficient background and include all relevant references?
Yes
Can be improved
Must be improved
Not applicable
1.2 Is the research design appropriate?
Yes
Can be improved
Must be improved
Not applicable
1.3 Are the methods adequately described?
Yes
Can be improved
Must be improved
Not applicable
1.4 Are the results clearly presented?
Yes
Can be improved
Must be improved
Not applicable
1.5 Are the conclusions supported by the results?
Yes
Can be improved
Must be improved
Not applicable
1.6 Are all figures and tables clear and well-presented?
Yes
Can be improved
Must be improved
Not applicable
If you answered otherwise than “yes” to any of the Content Quality Questions above, please justify your answer in “Comments and Suggestions for Authors” (section 6).
2. Quality of English Language
The English could be improved to more clearly express the research.
The English is fine and does not require any improvement.
3. Recommendations for PC (will not be shown to authors)
Do you have any potential conflicts of interest with regard to this paper?
Yes
No
Did you detect plagiarism?
Yes
No
Did you detect inappropriate self-citations by authors?
Yes
No
Do you have any other ethical concerns about this study?
Yes
No
If you answered “yes“ to any of the following questions, please give details in the "Comments for PC members" (section 7).
4. Overall Ratings
4.1 Originality/Novelty
High
Average
Low
No Answer
4.2 Significance of Content
High
Average
Low
No Answer
4.3 Quality of Presentation
High
Average
Low
No Answer
4.4 Scientific Soundness
High
Average
Low
No Answer
4.5 Interest to Readers
High
Average
Low
No Answer
4.6 Overall Merit
High
Average
Low
No Answer
5. Are the references cited in this manuscript appropriate and relevant to this research?
Yes
No
6. Comments and Suggestions for Authors
(will be shown to authors)
7. Comments for PC members
(will not be shown to authors)
8. Overall Recommendation
Strong Accept
Accept
Weak Accept
Borderline
Weak Reject
Reject
Strong Reject
Step
Отправить данные