**NOTE**: The following is only a template to help you critique a paper. Your reviews 
do not have to follow the format or all the questions. Be brief in articulating 
your review (try to keep it under 500 words).

* What is the motivation/goal of this work? 
  - Why the problem is important?
  - What are prior solutions and why they are inadequate?

* What is the main proposal of the paper?
  - Is it proposing a new idea, refuting common wisdoms, or applying (a combination 
    of) existing ideas in a new context?
  - What insight, if any, is behind the proposed solution?
  - Why is the proposal better than prior solutions?

* How well does the proposed solution work? 
  - 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?

* 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?
  - Did you learn something new?

* What questions are you left with?
  - Are there any confusing parts of the paper or missing points that are not addressed?

* What is the overall take-away message of this work?
  - Be concise.

* For historical papers:
  - What historical context (e.g., hardware trend) is the work in?
  - What things you were taking for granted but now understand how they came to be?
  - Is the paper still relevant for today?
    - If so, in what way?
    - If not, what has changed?