Paper Review Preparation Form (for 2nd review of regular papers)

This form is provided to help a paper reviewer to prepare a review 
report in PRMS (Paper Review Management System).
It shows the overall structure of the review report pages, as well as
information that needs to be filled out in each page.
By creating and saving this form beforehand, a review can easily enter
the review report in PRMS by copy and paste.
Please note that the form is just for preparation of review reports.
Submission of the form via email or other means is not accepted.
PRMS does not have a function to upload the form.

------------------------the first page---------------------------------
Review type (pre-populated)

Reviewer information 
Type (pre-populated)
Name (pre-populated)

Manuscript type (pre-populated)
Paper ID (pre-populated)
Date of receipt (pre-populated)
Date of review request (pre-populated)
Deadline for review (pre-populated)
Report date (pre-populated)
Title (pre-populated)
Abstract (pre-populated)

Review result 
Paper summary 
(not disclosed to author(s))
[     ]

Overall recommendation 
(not disclosed to author(s))
* Accept
* Reject

Rationale for decision 
(not disclosed to author(s))
[     ]

Originality 
(not disclosed to author(s))
Choose
5(Excellent)
4
3(Acceptable)
2
1(Poor)

Practicality
(not disclosed to author(s))
Choose
5(Excellent)
4
3(Acceptable)
2
1(Poor)

Reliability 
(not disclosed to author(s))
* Acceptable
* Unacceptable

Organization and readability 
(not disclosed to author(s))
* Acceptable
* Unacceptable

Relevance to IPSJ 
(not disclosed to author(s))
* OK
* Of little or no relevance. Submission to other academic journals is recommended.
e.g. [     ] 

Overall rating 
(not disclosed to author(s))
Choose
5(Excellent)
4
3(Acceptable)
2
1(Poor)

Reviewer knowledge of topic 
(not disclosed to author(s))
Choose
5(High)
4
3(Average)
2
1(Low)

Positive aspects of paper 
(not disclosed to author(s))
[     ]

Negative aspects of paper 
(not disclosed to author(s))
[     ]

Other comments to Editorial Committee of JIP 
(not disclosed to author(s))
[     ]

Recommendation for Outstanding Paper Award 
(not disclosed to author(s))
[ ]Yes

---------------the second page (in the case of "Accept")---------------
Explanation to author(s) about decision, i.e. `Accept' 

Comments to authors (useful information for possible minor revisions)
[     ]

---------------the second page (in the case of "Reject")---------------
Explanation to author(s) about decision, i.e. `Reject' 

Is major revision of the content necessary? 
* Yes
* No

If you chose 2 for `(a) Reasons for rejection' (see below), have you clearly identified the error? 
* Yes
* No

If you chose 3 for `(a) Reasons for rejection' (see below), have you clearly identified the published works? 
* Yes
* No

If you chose any of the reasons between 3 and 8 for `(a) Reasons for rejection' (see below), have you recommended one of the actions given in (b) (see below)? 
* Yes
* No

(a) Reason(s) for rejection
(choose appropriate answer(s))

[ ]1. The subject of the paper lies outside the area covered by the IPSJ. 
[ ]2. The paper contains one or more fundamental errors. 
[ ]3. The paper lacks originality since the results described can be easily derived from published materials or knowledge. 
[ ]4. The proofs offered are unconvincing or too weak. 
[ ]5. The paper is not expected to make a significant contribution to scientific and/or technological progress. 
[ ]6. The description and/or organization are not sufficiently clear to understand what has been achieved. 
[ ]7. One or more of the requirements indicated by reviewers are not properly satisfied. 
[ ]8. Other reason (simply describe only the type of your rejection reason). 
[     ]

(b) Recommendations 
[ ]We expect the author(s) to refine the work and resubmit the revised one. 
[ ]We expect the author(s) to further explore the subject and resubmit a revised paper. 
[ ]We expect the author(s) to resubmit as a technical note. 
 
Rationale for decision
[     ]

---------------the third page (for Meta-reviwer only)------------------
Instruction to committee

First decision
Accept if requirements are met (pre-populated)

Second decision
* Accept
* Reject

Rationale for decison
[     ] 
