[dcchairs2016] Review of UbiComp/ISWC 2016 Doctoral School submission 122

[dcchairs2016 at ubicomp.org]

Paper  122 - Using Context Recognition to Support User Monitoring and Awareness for Interruptibility on Smartphones
Reviewer 1 - Max Muhlhauser

Overall rating:  3  (scale is 1..6; 6 is best)

Pre-PC discussion (hidden from author)

   Potential to revise & resubmit (will be discussed at PC meeting) 

Confidence

   Very confident - I am knowledgeable in the area 

Contribution to UbiComp

   The paper is on using context recognition for managing notifications on
   Smartphones. Ctx. recognition gives decent UbiComp relation, the core of
   the paper (notifications) is more of a non-UbiComp theme, relation to
   UbiComp issues of Ctx is not very strong.
 

Overall Rating

   3  (Maybe reject: I would agree with rejecting this paper.)

R&R Suitability (hidden from author)

   It would be possible to improve within 5 weeks, but difficult	 

The Review

   The author describes a manifold system for detecting context and for
   using it for controlling notifications on Smartphones. The core
   ideas/hypotheses concern event-based triggers (considered superior than
   time-based triggers) of notifications and
   “interruptability-awareness” (complemented by user preferences). 
   The author establishes trust that an elaborate piece of research work has
   been developed and is reaching completion. This summary reveals to
   problems w.r.t. the doctoral school:
   -	The paper is pretty much an assembly of high-level descriptions  of the
   many contributions which the author has already published; hardly at any
   point can the reader “reach down” to the “meat” of scientific
   content developed
   -	The advancement of the thesis (completed except for some “analysis of
   results” and some “use-case related evaluations” according to the
   authors) does not permit much input from the DC panel.
   Given that the work is hard to judge (without reading the publications of
   the author as cited) and that there is not much left for the DC panel to
   contribute, I suggest to prefer other papers of authors that still have
   “a number of miles to go”.
 

Confidential Comments (Optional) (hidden from author)

 


To see the review, go to https://precisionconference.com/~ubicomp?goto=ubicomp16c