4a. Reviewing/Writing guidelines: Document Requirements.

A paper easy to be reviewed (and approved thereafter) should have:

• An attractive abstract. It does not mean a overwhelmed argument. It is just a brief explanation of what you do, why are you doing this work, an interesting result (the attraction), and clear conclusions.
• A clear justification about the reason of making it.
• A continuously written history: a beginning (introduction), a plot (methodology), a climax (results), an end (conclusions). All variables and definitions should be declared form the beginning of document.
• A name for the method, technique, case of study or discover. We recommend an acronym, namely the main acronym. The main acronym must be spread along the work paper. This allows to create a confidence about the explained term, and the reader will learn this acronym irremediably. However, one must consider a maximal number of acronym apparitions on text, avoiding annoyance.
• Your background, idea and argument must be "standing on the shoulders on giants", specially for review--type papers. I suggest the following:
• Creating things from nothing or from a not--so--good--made study, charges you in time and delusions. However, be careful if you aim at criticizing some work: normally, you will end losing, if you do not have a better idea.
• Plagiarism is never an option.  Just like in music composition, the credit is important for authors. If you make music over a sampling melody without author's authorization, you are immediately criticized by stealing and abusing from that composition. So, please provide a strictly citation from those information (Tables, Figures) coming from other people, with its related discussion. There are websites where plagiarism is investigated.
• Creativity and talent of the authors relies on the impact that their work provides over the state--of--art. An example is related with painting, when you try to draw some masterpiece using other technique: if your artwork is similar to the original, you falls into plagiarism; if your technique is immediately leaded to the original artist's technique, your contribution will be not significant. You must deeply analyze the other theories (mathematical background, methodology, experiments), before proposing a new one.
• Search for a target-rich environment of knowledge. For engineering, and most of areas in science, the following are the common used goals for research:
  - Enhancing or improving a recent technique.
  - Proposing a new technique by opposing to the hypothesis of the current ones.
  - Bringing a technique which works for some applications to the considered problem.