IDENTIFYING INFORMATION:
Title: 
Reference: 

1) Type of paper
a) _____ Research paper (with original results)
b) __X__ Application paper (experimentation __X__ / case study _____ )
c) _____ Survey of recent advances
d) _____ Position paper
e) _____ Other. Please specify ______________


2) General evaluation
Please rate the following criteria (a,...,f) by, each time, using only one
of the five following words: BAD, WEAK, FAIR, GOOD, EXCELLENT

a) Relevance to NICSO: FAIR
b) Originality: FAIR
c) Significance; usefulness: FAIR
d) Technical soundness: FAIR
e) Reference to the related literature: 
f) Presentation: FAIR


3) Summarized description of the paper (Please provide brief answers.)

- What is (are) the main contribution(s) of the paper to the field?

This paper speculates about how an artificial intelligence should be like through simple experiments in which an agent controlled by a neural network explores a two dimensional grid world. 

- How important is this contribution w.r.t. the state of the art?

The paper lacks literature review, so that the purpose of the research is not clear.

4) Discussion of technical aspects (detailed comments)
Please answer the following questions to any level of detail you find suitable :

- Indicate difficulties, flaws which weaken the analysis of the problems and the claims.

- In what respect does the paper lack originality, and/or what are the missing references?

- Technical soundness
a) ___ Technically correct (after careful check)
b) ___ Apparently correct (after superficial check)
c) ___ Minor errors (please indicate them):
d) _X_ Major errors (please indicate them):

- The analysis of the results is very weak.

e) ___ Unsupported claims (please provide a detailed explanation):

- Linguistic quality (Indicate English mistakes to be corrected, or send us
back the manuscript with proper corrections.)
a) ___ Very good
b) _X_ Acceptable
c) ___ Unreadable

********************************************
GENERAL RECOMMENDATION (choose only one)
a) ___ strong accept
b) ___ accept
c) ___ minor revision
d) ___ major revision
e) _X_ reject

Main reasons for your decision:

- For choices a, b please indicate:
1) ___ accept because of the originality (good ideas, sound presentation)
2) ___ accept because of the quality of the proposed synthesis (useful
review on recent advances)

- For choices c, d please indicate what has to be revised:



- For choice e please indicate:
1) ___ reject because it is not relevant to Fuzzy Sets and Systems
2) ___ reject because of the presentation
3) _X_ reject because the content is too premature
4) ___ reject because of lack of originality
(results already known; similar overview already published)
5) ___ reject because of major errors

--------------------------------------------------------------
*** 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.