--------------------------------------------------------------
--- For your convenience, this form can be processed by EasyChair
--- automatically. You can fill out this form offline and then
--- upload it to EasyChair. Several review forms can be uploaded
--- simultaneously. You can modify your reviews as many times as
--- you want.
--- When filling out the review form please mind
--- the following rules:
--- (1) Lines beginning with --- are comments. EasyChair will
---     ignore them. Do not start lines in your review with ---
---     as they will be ignored. You can add comments to the
---     review form or remove them
--- (2) Lines beginning with *** are used by EasyChair. Do not
---     remove or modify these lines or the review will become
---     unusable and will be rejected by EasyChair
--------------------------------------------------------------
*** REVIEW FORM ID: 347463::150101
*** SUBMISSION NUMBER: 7
*** TITLE: Small Digit Capacity Arithmetic for Problems of Discrete Optimization
*** AUTHORS: (anonymous)
*** PC MEMBER: Akira Imada
--------------------------------------------------------------
*** REVIEW:
---  Please provide a detailed review, including justification for
---  your scores. This review will be sent to the authors unless
---  the PC chairs decide not to do so. This field is required.
The survey shown in Introduction is poor. For example, the author wrote something like, "the works in 1987 and 1995 are continued in 2006 and 2007." But the duration between these two periods seems too long, unless any important research had not been done. In addition, the work in 1960 is continued the works in 1987 and 1995 is more like a back-to-the-future.

In addition to a poor expression in English, poor organization of the paper prevents readers from understanding the content totally. For example, the author should explain clearly at the very beginning of the paper, what is "clipping" which plays the most important role in this paper. 

It might be an interesting research work but author completely failed to show that.


--------------------------------------------------------------
*** REMARKS FOR THE PROGRAMME COMMITTEE:
---  If you wish to add any remarks for PC members, please write
---  them below. These remarks will only be used during the PC
---  meeting. They will not be sent to the authors. This field is
---  optional.

--------------------------------------------------------------
--- If the review was written by (or with the help from) a
--- subreviewer different from the PC member in charge, add
--- information about the subreviewer in the form below. Do not
--- modify the lines beginning with ***
*** REVIEWER'S FIRST NAME: (write in the next line)

*** REVIEWER'S LAST NAME: (write in the next line)

*** REVIEWER'S EMAIL ADDRESS: (write in the next line)

--------------------------------------------------------------
--- In the evaluations below, uncomment the line with your
--- evaluation or confidence. You can also remove the
--- irrelevant lines
*** OVERALL EVALUATION:

---  3 (strong accept)
---  2 (accept)
---  1 (weak accept)
---  0 (borderline paper)
---  -1 (weak reject)
-2 (reject)
---  -3 (strong reject)

*** REVIEWER'S CONFIDENCE:

---  4 (expert)
---  3 (high)
2 (medium)
---  1 (low)
---  0 (null)

*** RELEVANCE TO THIS CONFERENCE: from 1 (lowest) to 5 (highest)

---  5 (excellent)
---  4 (good)
3 (fair)
---  2 (poor)
---  1 (very poor)

*** ORIGINALITY/UNIQUENESS: from 1 (lowest) to 5 (highest)

---  5 (excellent)
---  4 (good)
---  3 (fair)
2 (poor)
---  1 (very poor)

*** ENGLISH READABILITY: from 1 (lowest) to 5 (highest)

---  5 (excellent)
---  4 (good)
---  3 (fair)
---  2 (poor)
1 (very poor)

*** PAPER ORGANIZATION/PRESENTATION: from 1 (lowest) to 5 (highest)

---  5 (excellent)
---  4 (good)
---  3 (fair)
---  2 (poor)
1 (very poor)

*** HAS GOOD SURVEY BEEN DONE?: from 1 (lowest) to 5 (highest)

---  5 (excellent)
---  4 (good)
---  3 (fair)
2 (poor)
---  1 (very poor)

*** END
--------------------------------------------------------------