Does the reviewed article correspond to the subject of the issue?
Are the problems discussed in the article new?
Does the article stimulate discussion of important issues or alternative points of view?
Is the relevance of research task proved?
Is the methodology of research clear enough?
Does this paper contain references to earlier studies focusing on similar tasks?
Is the experiment on which the conclusions were based described convincingly and reliably?
Does the paper have conclusions summarizing obtained results?
Do conclusions have any statements which are not derived from the paper content?
Are the results clearly presented?
Does the paper have any text with incorrect logic?
Does the paper have any statements which can be interpreted ambiguously?
Are the conclusions correctly / logically explained?
Does the reviewer recommend this paper to be published? There are possible types of decision:
Accept without revision;
Accept after minor revision;
Reconsider after major revision;
Reject, typically because it does not fit the criteria outlined above of originality, importance to the field, cross-discipline interest, or sound methodology.
Specific Reviewer Comments and Suggestions: