Review Form
AAAI Spring Symposium 2003 on
 Agent-Mediated Knowledge Management (AMKM-2003)
Paper #	: ____	  Title: ____________________________________
Author	: _______________________________________________
Reviewer	: _______________________________________________
1	Compliance of Contribution with AMKM Topic
In this section, we want to find out to what degree the contribution fits with the overall approach of the symposium. Due to the discussion-oriented character of the symposium we want to consider for exclusion only those contributions which are completely off-topic.
1.1	How much related to the Knowledge Management topic is the contribution?
off-topic = 1  2  3  4  5 = excellent
_  _  _  _  _
1.2	How much related to the Agents topic is the contribution?
off-topic = 1  2  3  4  5 = excellent
_  _  _  _  _
2	Quality of Contribution
In general, the goal is not to exclude low-quality contributions from the symposium. Rather we want to adjust the form of publication and presentation to the level of quality and give the authors feedback for improvements.
2.1	Originality
Has this or similar work been previously reported?  Are the problems and approaches completely new? Is this a novel combination of familiar techniques? Does the paper discuss relevant research, or is it reinventing the wheel using new terminology?
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
2.2	Significance
How important is the work reported?  Does it attack an important/difficult problem or a peripheral/simple one? Does the approach offer an advance in the state of the art?
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
2.3	Maturity of Work
Does the paper describe conceptual work, an implemented system, or an evaluated system? Is the paper technically sound? Does it carefully evaluate the strengths and limitations of its contribution? Dimensions for evaluation include generality, empirical behavior, theoretical analysis, psychological validity, and knowledge of relevant related work.
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
2.4	Clarity of Presentation
Does the paper describe methods and tools in sufficient detail for readers to replicate the work? Does it describe inputs, outputs, and the basic algorithms employed? Is the paper well organized and well written?
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
2.5	Adequate Form of Publication
I suggest 
__ NO / __ SHORT / __ LONG presentation.

The central topics of the contribution are of 
__ HIGH / __ MEDIUM / __ LOW interest for a special interest discussion group.

Inclusion in a journal special issue is
__ HIGHLY / __ SOMEHOW / __ NOT AT ALL recommended.

In the case of an Extended Abstract:
I suggest to invite for upgrade to a full paper:
__ STRONG YES / __ YES / __ WEAK NO / __ STRONG NO
3	Content Classification
3.1	The paper deals with 
__ AMKM theory
__ a case study
__ a system
__ ________________.
3.2	Please assign maximal two keywords to the paper.
1. ____________________________________
2. ____________________________________
4	General Remarks
4.1	To the author(s) of the paper
Suggestions for improvement, miscellaneous
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
4.2	To the symposium chairs
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________