Consider the associated yes/no questions before assigning a score for each criteria. Ignore the criteria "Confidence" that is present in the software review system.

1. Mechanics of Communication 

  I. Were the slides easy to read and not overcrowded?

 II. Was the talk audible from every seat in the room?

III. Were all crucial slides presented for long enough?

 IV. Did the speaker avoid distractive movement and gesture?

2. Presentation

 I. Was the talk well presented (e.g., no major types, no slides out of order, good time management)?

II. Did the speaker strive to keep the audience's attention (e.g., eye contact, varying voice and facial expression, movement, humour, mystery, surprise)? 

3. Structure

  I. Did the talk have a distinct introductory section, middle section, and concluding section?

 II. Did the introduction make clear what the talk was about?

III. Did the middle section explain the main results, techniques, and terms clearly and correctly?

 IV. In the middle section, did the speaker strive to make subtle ideas simpler? 

  V. Did the conclusion summarize the important ideas and results?

 VI. Was it clear what the audience should take away from the talk? 

4. Discussion

 I. Did the talk stimulate interesting questions?

II. Did the speaker come up with interesting questions?

5. Comments

Please provide detailed comments in the "Comments to the Authors" section in the review page on each of the criteria that you thought to have "no" as the answer.

For example, if you thought the answer to (2.I) is "no", you might put in something like this:

(2.I) <your comment here>