ManuscriptreviewRecommendation1.Publishafterminorchanges2.Publishunaltered3.Reviewagainaftermajorchanges4.Reject(PaperisnotofsufficientqualityornoveltytobepublishedinthisJournal)5.Reject(Paperisseriouslyflawed;donotencourageresubmission.)A.Evaluation1.Howdoyouevaluatethemanuscript?ExcellentGoodFairPoorB.Content1.Isthispaperoforiginalvalue?Yes,definitelyTosomeextentHardlyIcannotjudgethis2.Isthispaperscientificallycorrect?YesProbably,althoughalldetailshavenotbeencheckedDoubtful3.Towhatextentwilltheresultsbeusefulforotherscientists?LargeAverageSmall4.Howwouldyoucharacterizethelevelofthepaper?ForexpertsonlyUsefulforpeopleworkinginrelatedfieldsUnderstandablealsofornonspecialistsSuperficial6.Isthebibliographyreasonable?YesAfterminormodificationsNoC.Presentation1.Isthistitleadequate?YesNo2.Doestheabstractgiveacorrectdescriptionofthecontent?YesNo3.Isthegeneralorganizationofthepaperacceptable?YesNo4.Withrespecttothecontent,isthelengthofthepaperreasonable?YesNo,shouldbeincreasedNo,shouldbedecreased5.Howdoyouratereadability?GoodSomeeffortneededLargeeffortneededUnreadable