Skip to content

Review guidelines

ART editor board expects the reviewer to solely focus on the (technical) content of the ART and the reasoning behind the presented ideas and results. While the formatting and use of language is not the main focus of the review, if as a reviewer, you feel that the ART would benefit from a better formatting or use of language, please feel free to point it out.

The feedback is expected to be:

  • respectful,
  • constructive, and
  • direct to the point.

The following questions can help you structure your feedback, but we do not expect you cover all of them by any means. The list has been clickable for your convenience.

Clarity and Presentation

  • Is the ART structured in a coherent and logical manner?
  • Are key ideas, results, and methodologies communicated effectively?
  • Does the ART consistently use correct and standard terminology throughout?
  • Are the sections relevant and appropriately placed within the context of the ART?
  • Are equations included where necessary and are they clearly presented and explained?
  • Do the figures and tables have appropriate captions and are they referenced correctly in the text?

Technical Soundness

  • Are the (mathematical) formulations in the ART accurate and reliable?
  • Do the theorems and their accompanying proofs adhere to strict logical principles?

Results and Interpretation

  • Are the goals/results of the ART explicitly stated?
  • In case of original research, how do these findings align or contrast with existing literature?
  • Is there consistency between the results and their interpretation within the ART?

Impact and Relevance

  • Are the implications of the results discussed in terms of practical applications or theoretical significance?
  • Is the relationship of the research to the Anoma project clearly articulated?
  • Is there a new research track to pursue as the result of the findings?


  • Are the references current and pertinent to the ART's subject matter?
  • Is prior work acknowledged correctly, and does the ART build upon it effectively?
  • Did the authors consider other ARTs that might be relevant to their work? Check out the ref.bib file here for a list of ART references that are already published.

Ethical Considerations

  • If applicable, is there evidence that the research adhered to accepted ethical standards?