Hi all, >From what we understand the review of the abstracts was carried out by the scientific committee of the workshop, not by external reviewers or by the authors of other abstracts in the workshop (as done e.g. for the FEniCS book). From the review comments it's clear that one of the primary criteria is how well connected the work is to one of the software branches that the members of the review panel are working on, and not scientific quality. Given that FEniCS is a community project and FEniCS'15 is the only meeting of the year for developers, a public discussion of the review criteria would have been natural.
We understand that rescheduling of the presentations might be too difficult at this point for FEniCS 15, but we hope that we can agree on a more constructive and balanced review procedure for the future. Despite the problems with the review process, we decided to participate in the workshop and we hope to contribute to a fun meeting in the spirit of scientific advancement. Johan Hoffman, Johan Jansson, Susanne Claus
_______________________________________________ fenics mailing list [email protected] http://fenicsproject.org/mailman/listinfo/fenics
