**NOTE**: Your reviews do not have to follow this format. But you must summarize the key points of the paper and your thoughts. Your review also needs to answer the paper-specific questions, if any, listed in the assignment. Be brief and articulate in your review.

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

## Review for "Paper Title XXX"

[your name] & [date]

### Motivation & goal
  - What kind of reliability problem this work addresses? 
  - Why is this problem important?
  - What is the end goal of this work?

### Related work
  - What are the state-of-the-art solutions addressing this problem?
  - Why are they inadequate?

### Idea & insight
  - What is the new idea the paper proposes?
  - What is the insight, if any, behind this idea?
  - Why *might* this idea be better than prior work?

### Solution
  - Roughly speaking, how does the solution work? Its input, output, basic workflow, etc.
  - What are the key techniques and algorithms used in the solution?
  - On what platform is the solution implemented?

### Assumption & limitations
  - What assumptions do the proposed solution make?
  - Are these assumptions reasonable? Are there any assumption that the authors did not describe in the paper? 
  - What limitations does this solution have?

### Effectiveness 
  - What experiments, analyses are conducted to evaluate the solution?
  - Do these results and analyses back up the authors' claim?
  - Are there any missing aspects in the evaluation?

### Comparison 
  - How does this work compare with some other works we have read/discussed?
  - Does it take a radically different approach or draw a surprising conclusion?
  - Or is it more or less in line with the direction in the other works?

### Learning & thoughts
  - Are you convinced that the proposed idea/solution is good?
    - that it will work well in practice?
    - e.g., will you be comfortable using it?
  - If not, what flaws you see in the work that can be improved?
  - What are the new things you learned from this paper?

### Unanswered questions
  - What questions are you left with?
  - Are there any confusing parts of the paper that are not addressed?
  - If you were the authors, is there anything you would do differently?

### Conclusion
  - What conclusion do you draw from this work?
  - What are the main take-away messages?
  - Can you relate to the findings/solutions/results from your own experience?

### Q: paper specific question
  - A: