SRC preparation

You will be expected to prepare a poster and present your work at the
conference as part of this poster session.
Monday, October 15, 2007, 13:30-14:50 Posters & Demo Session 1

confirmed size of the poster boards is 36" x 48"(landscape)

The top contestants will be asked to give a short (10 minute plus
time for questions) presentation at this session.
Tuesday, October 16, 2007. 11:20-11:50 Student research competition
presentations
------------------------------------
write down possible challenging questions.
Review

ASSETS
-------------------- review 1 --------------------
Please address each of the following issues in your review:
* What original contribution is being made to the field of accessibility? Why does it matter?

This abstract discusses a technology for way finding that will assist individuals with cognitive impairments.
It combines a encoding technology called QR codes, PDAs and a tracking system.

* The validity of the methodology and results. How confidently can others take up the work?

The architectural components that make up the technology have not been presented in an understandable way so to get a sense of what is unique or novel. For example Figure 3, which seems to be a key component is hardly explained.
As far as the usage of this technology is concerned what I would like to know is this - does it
need care givers to monitor the system. It appears to be.
It is not clear how others can take this work up.

* Coverage of related research.

There are just 3 references. So
it is difficult to clearly assess the contribution of this work w.r.t. related work.

* Organization, language and written presentation.

The abstract is not well presented. The language and writing is ok.


-------------------- review 2 --------------------
Please address each of the following issues in your review:

* What original contribution is being made to the field of accessibility? Why does it matter? hand held navigation aid using visible waymarks

* The validity of the methodology and results. How confidently can others take up the work?
the description of the deviation management scheme should be expanded

* Coverage of related research.
ok... there's a lot more, but can't all be sited in an abstract

* Organization, language and written presentation.
good

"

WISH 2007

=========================================

> <Review #1>
>
> Provide a short summary of the paper:
> This paper proposes a personal guidance prototype system based on
> geo-coded QR codes and social computing for individuals with cognitive
> impairments. The prototype system consists of PDAs, a training blog, and a
> tracking system.
>
> What is the strength of the paper? (1-3 sentences):
> The idea of this wayfinding prototype system is novel. It employs QR codes
> and social computing to implement the wayfind system. The description of
> system functionalities is clear.
> What is the weakness of the paper? (1-3 sentences):
> 1. Compared with sensor network, the approach proposed in this paper
> depends mostly on social computing. Although this approach is novel, it
> may fail for some patients.
> 2. This paper gives a clear introduction of the complete system. However,
> the paper does not give out any key algorithms and performance metrics.
> 3. The presentation needs to be improved.
>
> 4. Experimental data are not enough.
> Your qualifications to review this paper :
> I know the material, but am not an expert
>
> Writing Quality:
> Average
>
> Relevance to WISH?:
> People would attend session, but not read it beforehand
>
> Experimental Methodology:
> Average
>
> Novelty of paper:
> This is a new contribution to an established area
>
> Overall paper merit:
> Accept - This is of interest to WISH, a novel or new contribution with
> average/weak methodology, or incremental contribution paper that has good
> methodology.
>
> Is this paper a candidate for the best paper award?:
> No
>
> Provide additional detailed comments to the author:
> This paper proposes a personal guidance prototype system based on
> geo-coded QR codes and social computing for individuals with cognitive
> impairments. The prototype system consists of PDAs, a training blog, and a
> tracking system. Some suggestions/comments:
>
> 1. Compared with sensor network, the approach proposed in this paper
> depends mostly on social computing. Although this approach is novel, it
> may fail for some patients.
> 2. This paper gives a clear introduction of the complete system. However,
> the paper does not give out any key algorithms and performance metrics.
> 3. The presentation needs to be improved.
>
> 4. Experimental data are not enough.
>
>
> Review #1>
>
>
> <Review #2>
>
> Provide a short summary of the paper:
> The paper describes a wayfinding system to help cognitive impaired people
> and guide them in finding the way to their destination
>
> What is the strength of the paper? (1-3 sentences):
> Simple architecture and prototype implementation
>
> What is the weakness of the paper? (1-3 sentences):
> simple architecture
>
> Your qualifications to review this paper :
> I know the material, but am not an expert
>
> Writing Quality:
> Average
>
> Relevance to WISH?:
> People would attend session
>
> Experimental Methodology:
> Average
>
> Novelty of paper:
> Incremental improvement
>
> Overall paper merit:
> Weak Reject - Paper is potentially of interest to WISH,, and has some
> value in the ideas presented, but it has either potential methodology
> issues or it is a borderline incremental/already been done contribution.
>
> Is this paper a candidate for the best paper award?:
> No
>
> Provide additional detailed comments to the author:
> The paper proposes a simple architecture for a wayfinding system useful to
> guide people with cognitive problems.
> The technological novelty of the paper and of the approach is poor. Anyway
> the system seems to work well and the presentation is good.
> In order to increase the technological novelty why don't consider more
> interactive system with "push" technology, where the portable device
> interact for example with RFIDs (inplace of QR codes)?
>
> Some comments:
> -briefly introduce QR codes
> -how the system does recognize a deviation from the predefined way?