International Journal of Ad Hoc & Sensor Wireless Networks ========================================================== Special Issue for MSN05 PAPER REVIEW FORM ----------------- Title: Energy-Efficient Aggregate Query Evaluation in Sensor Networks Author(s): Zhuoyuan Tu, Weifa Liang Reviewer: Guihai Chen 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 | 3 | 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 | 3 | 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 | 3 | 3=Somewhat original |-----| 2=Variation of a known concept 1=Complete lack of original ideas --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Practical Utility 5=Excellent |-----| 4=Very good | 2 | 3=Good |-----| 2=Fair 1=Poor --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Quality of 5=Very good Presentation |-----| 4=Basically well written | 4 | 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) | 3 | 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)): ------------------------------------ This paper is well written and organized. The authors introduced a capability concept. Based on this concept, the authors first proposed a heuristic algorithm which aimed to prolong the network lifetime. Then, an improved algorithm was presented in order to reduce the energy consumption with group aggregation. However, both algorithms are Prim¡¯s Algorithm-like, and not distributed. Experimental results show that the algorithms do work in simulations. The following are some comments in detail: 1. The first sentence in the abstract ¡°Wireless sensor networks have been widely used for communication and surveillance environments¡± seems to have overstated the case. 2. In 1, on the description of Intel Mote 2, does it really measure approximately 2mm * 2.5mm * 1mm? 3. In 3.2, in order to compute C (v, u), global information such as distance between nodes, residual energy of the nodes should be known. These assumptions should be stated explicitly. 4. In 4.1, at the line 11 of the pseudo-code, the value of dmin should also be updated. Then ¡°if there are more than one better parent to choose from, the closest one will be chosen.¡± 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).