What it's like to be a POPL referee
ACM SIGACT News
A guide for new referees in theoretical computer science
ACM SIGACT News
Getting research students started: a tale of two courses
SIGCSE '93 Proceedings of the twenty-fourth SIGCSE technical symposium on Computer science education
How to succeed in graduate school: a guide for students and advisors: part II of II
Crossroads - Special issue on operating systems
Web services as the foundation for learning complex software system development
Proceedings of the 35th SIGCSE technical symposium on Computer science education
Journal of Theoretical and Applied Electronic Commerce Research
From the Editor in Chief: All Systems Go
IEEE Internet Computing
Open issues in organizing computer systems conferences
ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review
Before and after WOWCS: a literature survey, a list of papers we wish had been submitted
WOWCS'08 Proceedings of the conference on Organizing Workshops, Conferences, and Symposia for Computer Systems
Wiki content evaluation framework
Proceedings of the 26th annual ACM international conference on Design of communication
The ACM SIGCOMM 2009 technical program committee process
ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review
Reading a computer science research paper
ACM SIGCSE Bulletin
A systematic review of UML model consistency management
Information and Software Technology
Author guidelines for the IBM systems journal
IBM Systems Journal
Wiki: how to improve information quality?
ACS'09 Proceedings of the 9th WSEAS international conference on Applied computer science
Producers and evaluators of information
Proceedings of the Workshop on Open Source and Design of Communication
| Hi-index | 4.10 |
Computer researchers have a professional obligation to referee the work of others. This article tells you how to evaluate a paper and write a report using common standards and procedures. It focuses on research papers in applied areas of computer science and engineering, such as systems architecture, hardware, communications, and performance evaluation, but most of the discussion is generally applicable; separate sections consider research proposals and survey and tutorial papers.