Paper: 349269
Title: Toward a Moving Object Identification by Spiking Neurons

-------------------- review 1 --------------------
---------------------------- REVIEW 1 --------------------------
PAPER: 11
TITLE: Toward a Moving Object Identification by Spiking Neurons
 
OVERALL RATING: -1 (weak reject) 
REVIEWER'S CONFIDENCE: 2 (medium) 
Relevance to this conference: 4 (good)
Originality/Uniqueness: 2 (poor)
English readability: 4 (good)
Paper organization/presentation: 3 (fair)
Has good survey been done?: 1 (very poor)


In general, the paper is written poorly, that was stated by its authors. The question arises, why we should use neural network (in particular spiking neural networks) to solve such problem (there are a lot of methods to identify moving object). There are two obvious answers, one is because they give a significant advantage compared with other methods (not shown in the paper), and the second is that it helps to facilitate interaction with other neural networks (also not reflected in the paper). There is no theoretical or experimental confirmation of the effectiveness of the proposed method for moving object identification. The neural network (section 2.3) used by authors is described quite blurry, resulting in doubts whether it can identify a moving object at all. I'd recommend to accept the report only if authors give at least theoretical or experimental (better both) justification of the effectiveness of proposed method. Article written at fairly good English, and in this respect, there's no any reproaches. 



-------------------- review 2 --------------------
---------------------------- REVIEW 2 --------------------------
PAPER: 11
TITLE: Toward a Moving Object Identification by Spiking Neurons
 
OVERALL RATING: 2 (accept) 
REVIEWER'S CONFIDENCE: 3 (high) 
Relevance to this conference: 5 (excellent)
Originality/Uniqueness: 5 (excellent)
English readability: 4 (good)
Paper organization/presentation: 4 (good)
Has good survey been done?: 3 (fair)


The submitted article is a position paper and the author explains capabilities of spiking neurons to be applied in a moving object identification system. Generally speaking, the paper starts on an current example of such system and moves to a novel proposition.

It is hard to address the scientific quality as it is a position paper, however due to an interesting application and author's determination to explain the future research project and to discuss it during the conference I accept this paper.

Examining the paper's structure - it is well written but the introduction section misses a part explaining the idea of spiking neurons. They occur very rarely in the other papers thus an draft introduction to this unobvious material is a must, otherwise a reader is forced to exploit this subject elsewhere.

I recommend to remove the sentence "The author know that even as a position paper, this is totally immature to submit to an international conference." (Final remarks). I'd be more appropriate to introduce a solid future plan instead of excusing oneself, especially that the article, as quite interesting proposition, should be credited to be publicly discussed.

From the editorial perspective, there are no major errors apart that the equations numbers are missing. 



-------------------- review 3 --------------------
---------------------------- REVIEW 3 --------------------------
PAPER: 11
TITLE: Toward a Moving Object Identification by Spiking Neurons
 
OVERALL RATING: -3 (strong reject) 
REVIEWER'S CONFIDENCE: 4 (expert) 
Relevance to this conference: 1 (very poor)
Originality/Uniqueness: 1 (very poor)
English readability: 4 (good)
Paper organization/presentation: 1 (very poor)
Has good survey been done?: 1 (very poor)


The paper presents - as the authors state - only a position paper.
There is no research presentation, no result, nothing. Basically is the presentation of a known problem and some background knowledge which is already available in the literature.
There is no value even from the point of view of a tutorial or as introduction to the problem.