C377 Editor's Letter
Dear XYZ,
We enclose a referee's report on
C377:

We agree with the referee that the current paper cannot be published as it gives little 
information on the SAM implementation but rather is largely a review of relatively well 
known approaches to parallel processing. We would be happy to reconsider a revised 
paper which would need to be rereviewed as it would have a very different balance from 
the current paper.
We thank you for your interest in publishing in Concurrency:Practice and Experience.

C380 Referee's report
This is an interesting paper, which I would recommend for publication. I do however 
suggest clarifying section 4. I did not understand why there was little dependence on n -- 
the number of equations. Surely there is at least a linear dependence on this and perhaps 
for Schrodinger case a quadratic form. Also some comment on the observed speedup 
would be helpful. One could look at this naively compared to sequential limit of given 
algorithm and better compared to optimal sequential method.

C380 Letter
Dear XYZ,
We enclose a referee report on
C380:
We would be pleased to publish your paper without further review. We suggest that you 
make the modest changes by the referee and look forward to a Revised Version, which 
should be accompanied by a memo describing your response to the referee.
We thank you for your interest in publishing in Concurrency:Practice and Experience.

C379 Referee Report
This is an interesting paper, which certainly is of the quality appropriate for publication. 
The formulation seems interesting and novel but perhaps does not reference related 
references properly. Several groups have studied DSMC and similar particle in the cell 
codes with attention to load balancing. The type of dynamic load balancing considered by 
authors is important in other areas such as discrete event simulations used in modeling 
and simulation community. The paper could be improved if it is placed in this more 
general context.

C379 Letter
Dear XYZ,
We include enclose a referee report on
C380:
We would be pleased to publish your paper without further review. We suggest that you 
make the modest changes by the referee and look forward to a Revised Version, which 
should be accompanied by a memo describing your response to the referee.
We thank you for your interest in publishing in Concurrency:Practice and Experience.