Subject: CandC:PandE Referee Report From: Greg Lyzenga Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2001 10:46:53 -0700 To: "Geoffrey Fox(CandC:PandE Referee Report)" REFEREE'S REPORT Concurrency and Computation:Practice and Experience ------------------------------------------------------------------------ A: General Information Please return to: Geoffrey C. Fox Electronically Preferred fox@csit.fsu.edu Concurrency and Computation: Practice and Experience Computational Science and Information Technology Florida State University 400 Dirac Science Library Tallahassee Florida 32306-4130 Office FAX 850-644-0098 Office Phone 850-644-4587 but best is cell phone 3152546387 Please fill in Summary Conclusions (Sec. C) and details as appropriate in Secs. D, E and F. B: Refereeing Philosophy We encourage a broad range of readers and contributors. Please judge papers on their technical merit and separate comments on this from those on style and approach. Keep in mind the strong practical orientation that we are trying to give the journal. Note that the forms attached provide separate paper for comments that you wish only the editor to see and those that both the editor and author receive. Your identity will of course not be revealed to the author. C: Paper and Referee Metadata * Paper Number Cnnn: C504 * Date: Received March 2 2001 * Paper Title: Effective Adaptation Technique for Hexahedral Mesh * Author(s): Yoshitaka Wada * Referee: G. A. Lyzenga * Address: Dept. of Physics, Harvey Mudd College, Claremont, CA 91711-5990 Referee Recommendations. Please indicate overall recommendations here, and details in following sections. 2. accepted provided changes suggested are made D: Referee Comments (For Editor Only) The technical content of the paper is valuable and of practical importance. It could be an important reference for developers of complex finite element meshes. A weakness of the presentation is its reliance upon almost exclusively pictorial descriptions of concepts, and a relative dearth of defined terms and algorithms. This difficulty is exacerbated by the fact that the standard of English grammar and usage are rather poor. As a result, some of the reasoning and explanations are rather difficult to follow. E: Referee Comments (For Author and Editor) Could be improved with clearer definitions of terms and exposition of key algorithms. F: Presentation Changes The paper would benefit from thorough review by a proofreader improving the English usage and grammar.