Dari Pa L*** di sebuah milis, yang sedang membahas seputar penulisan paper.

Taken from IEEE: http://www.ieee.org/portal/pages/about/awards/guidelines/criter.html

Criteria for Judging IEEE Prize Paper Awards:


The value of a paper is a function of the degree to which it presents new or novel technical material. Does the paper present results previously unknown? Does it push forward the frontiers of knowledge? Does it present new methods for solving old problems or new viewpoints on old problems? Or, on the other hand, is it a rehash of information already known?


The value of a paper is a function of the innate character or degree of excellence of the work described. Was the work performed, or the study made with a high degree of thoroughness? Was high engineering skill demonstrated? Is an experiment described which has a high degree of elegance? Or, on the other hand, is the work described pretty much of a run-of-the-mill nature?


The value of a paper is a function of the degree to which it represents an overall contribution to the advancement of the art. This is different from originality. A paper may be highly original, but may be concerned with a very minor, or even insignificant, matter or problem. On the other hand, a paper may make a great contribution by collecting and analyzing known data and facts and pointing out their significance. Or, a fine exposition of a known, but obscure or complex, phenomenon or theory or system or operating technique may be a very real contribution to the art. Obviously, a paper may well score highly on both originality and contribution. Perhaps a significant question is, will the engineer who reads the paper be able to practice his profession more effectively because of having read it?


The value of the paper is a function of the ease with which the reader can determine what the author is trying to present. Regardless of the other criteria, a paper is not good unless the material is presented clearly and effectively. Is the paper well written? Is the meaning of the author clear? Are the tables, charts and figures clear? Is their meaning readily apparent? Is the information presented in the paper complete? At the same time, is the paper concise?