ECE 495 — Electromagnetic Warfare and Survivability
Lesson 39: Peer Review
Permanent Professor and Head
Electrical and Computer Engineering
Fall 2026
Block 4 · Lesson 39 · The Clock
Today's Clock
| Clock | What happens |
|---|---|
| 0–5 min | Drafts in through Teams; reviewers assigned |
| 5–15 min | Calibrate: one sample paragraph, marked against the rubric |
| 15–45 min | Review #1, on the peer-review form |
| 45–50 min | Review #1 submitted; hand-off to review #2 |
Every cadet reviews two papers and receives two reviews.
Block 4 · Lesson 39 · Teams
How Drafts and Reviews Move
- One PDF, through the course Teams team, at the start of class
- The instructor assigns two reviewers to every paper
- Your reviewers read the PDF — nothing else
- Two papers: #1 today, #2 before the start of L40
- On the peer-review form — printed, or an annotated PDF
- A PDF through Teams; the author revises from it at L40
Block 4 · Lesson 39 · The Form
The Peer-Review Form
- Circle one band: Exceeds · Meets · Developing · Missing
- One comment: where, what you see, what would fix it
- Line 6 is a self-check on your own review; line 7 names the comment the author must answer
- The citation check: open two of the author's cited lessons
- The strongest element of the paper
- The single change that would most improve it
Block 4 · Lesson 39 · Calibrate
Calibrate: Review This Paragraph
The aspect-aware route (Fig. 7) threads the gap between the two medium-range sites and greatly improves survivability over the shortest route. The planning grid is fine enough to resolve every lethal zone [9]. Fig. 8 shows the passive network's error along the route; it stays small for the whole ingress. This route is therefore the safest possible ingress, and with the stand-off jammer it defeats the integrated air defense.
[9] “Route planning tips,” anonymous post, flight-simulation forum, 2022. [Online].
Fig. 8. Passive-network DRMS along the route.
Block 4 · Lesson 39 · Good Reviews
What a Good Review Looks Like
| Weak | Good | |
|---|---|---|
| Comment | “The method section is confusing and could use more detail. Nice figures overall!” | “Sec. IV, p. 3: every edge uses the nose-on $\sigma$, yet Fig. 5 calls the route aspect-aware. Route method and cost design — Developing. State the $\sigma$ each edge uses; if nose-on, rebuild the costs by heading on a digraph.” |
| Specific | No page, section or figure | Section, page and figure named |
| Accurate | Nothing to check | Names the model error exactly |
| Anchored | No rubric line, no band | One line, one band, one fix |
Block 4 · Lesson 39 · Citation Check
The Citation Check
- Are all four blocks cited — at least one lesson each?
- Pick two cited lessons that carry a claim the paper depends on
- Open each from the URL in its reference: does it support the claim, where it is cited?
- Any external source: credible, and vetted in one line in Appendix A?
Block 4 · Lesson 39 · Review #1
Review #1: Thirty Minutes
One paper, one form, thirty minutes:
- Read the whole draft once before you mark anything
- Then line by line: one band and one comment each
- The citation check, the strongest element, the single change
- Submit through Teams before you leave
Block 4 · Lesson 39 · After Today
Review #2 and Your Response
- Your second paper, assigned today
- The same form — an annotated PDF works
- Through Teams before the start of L40
- Every comment from both reviews gets a row
- Changed: what, and where in the final
- Not changed: why, with your evidence
ResponseToReviewers.tex, due with the final at L41
Block 4 · Lesson 39 · Wrap-Up
Wrap-Up
- Review #1 submitted through Teams
- Your review #2 paper downloaded
- Your own two reviewers' names known
- L40: Revision Work Day — bring both reviews
- L41, start of class: final paper, response table, code and AI transcripts, through Teams
- HW4 due and Quiz 4 at L41