International Journal of Ad Hoc & Sensor Wireless Networks
        ==========================================================

                       Special Issue for MSN05

	
                          PAPER REVIEW FORM
                          -----------------

Title: Approximate Optimal Power Allocation Scheme for Wireless Ad hoc Networks in Rayleigh Fading Channels

Author(s): Dan Xu , Zhisheng Niu , Fangyu Hu

Reviewer: Jean-Michel Dricot
         
Date To Be Returned:  10 Jan 06

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------


I. NUMERICAL RATING OF THE PAPER:

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Rating Category    Your Rating       Scale Definition
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
 Level of                        5=Excellent
 Reader Interest      |-----|    4=Very good
                      |  4  |    3=Good
                      |-----|    2=Fair
                                 1=Poor
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Evaluation of Work              5=Excellent work and a major contribution
 and Contribution     |-----|    4=Good solid work of some importance
                      |  4  |    3=Solid work but marginal contribution
                      |-----|    2=Marginal work and very minor contribution
                                 1=Very questionable work and contribution
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Originality                     5=Highly original work
 Novelty              |-----|    4=Contains an original contribution
                      |  4  |    3=Somewhat original
                      |-----|    2=Variation of a known concept
                                 1=Complete lack of original ideas
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Practical Utility               5=Excellent
                      |-----|    4=Very good
                      |  5  |    3=Good
                      |-----|    2=Fair
                                 1=Poor
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Quality of                      5=Very good
 Presentation         |-----|    4=Basically well written
                      |  5  |    3=Readable
                      |-----|    2=Needs considerable work
                                 1=Unacceptably bad
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Technical                       5=Very good
 Correctness          |-----|    4=Good
                      |  4  |    3=Flaws but easy to correct
                      |-----|    2=Some flaws
                                 1=Unacceptably bad
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
 Overall Rating                  5=Strong accept (very good quality)
 (could be .5)        |-----|    4=Accept (good quality)
                      |  4  |    3=Accept if room (marginal quality)
 	              |-----|    2=Likely reject (low quality)
                                 1=Definitely reject (has no merit)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------


II. SPECIFIC COMMENTS & SUGGESTIONS (to be made available to the author(s)):
------------------------------------
1. There are some typos like:
	- distance dependent -> distance-dependent
	- near optimal -> near-optimal
	- etc.
2. On equation (6) and (17), the authors should tell what is "s.t." under the min sign of the sum.
3. In chapt.I, second paragraph, "Much work [1][2][3][4][5]..." : the extensive enumeration of references does not look good. The rest of paragraph is self-contained are and well-written enough.





III. CONFIDENTIAL COMMENTS (IF ANY) to be withheld from the author(s):
------------------------------------

Comments given under THIS item are for the EDITORS ONLY (to be withheld 
from the authors).