Mobile Computing
and Communications Review


Reviewers Guidelines

MC2R will maintain a high technical quality, which must stem from strong and active participation by researchers in the computing and networking community. We are seeking strong participation from the professional community and are asking researchers at various stages of their research career to review submissions.

Below we have attempted to provide a few helpful questions for reviewers to consider when they are evaluating manuscripts. These questions are, of course, not meant to be all-inclusive but intended to provide a starting point for evaluation. Once a reviewer has considered the manuscript, there is a review form provided through the link below that can be printed or emailed back to the editors. Additionally, MC2R is often looking for knowledgeable experts in the mobile computing field to provide reviews. A sign-up form is available below.


General Questions To Ask

The questions below have been adapted from the article "How (and How Not) to Write a Good Systems Paper" by Roy Levin and David D. Redell, that appeared in Proc., 9th SOSP, 1983.

  1. Original Ideas
    • Are the ideas in the paper new?
    • Can you state the new ideas concisely?
    • What exactly is the problem being solved?
    • Are the ideas significant enough to justify a paper?
    • Is the work described significantly different from existing work?
    • Are comparisons with previous work clear and explicit?
    • Does the work comprise a significant extension, validation or repudiation of earlier ideas?

  2. Lessons
    • What have you learned from the work?
    • What should the reader learn from the paper?
    • How generally applicable are these lessons?

  3. Context
    • What are the assumptions on which the work is based?
    • Are they realistic?
    • How sensitive is the work to perturbations of these assumptions?
    • If a formal model is presented, does it give new information and insights?
    • What were the (design or modeling) alternatives considered at various points, and why were the choices made the way they were?

  4. Focus
    • Does the introductory material contain excess baggage not needed for the paper's main development?
    • Does the paper include just enough material from previously published works to enable the reader to follow the material?

  5. Presentation
    • Are the ideas organized and presented in a clear and logical way?
    • Are terms defined before they are used?
    • Does the abstract communicate the important ideas of the paper?
    • Is the paper finished?

  6. Writing Style
    • Is the writing clear and concise?
    • Are words spelled and used correctly?
    • Are the sentences complete and grammatically correct?
    • Are ambiguity, slang, etc. avoided?


    Please send comments and/or suggestions on this page to the

    MC2R Editors, editors_sigmobile@acm.org

    Back to the MC2R Home Page, or the ACM SIGMOBILE Home Page