IBM Almaden 研究中心 的研究員 Tessa Lau在 ACM 通訊的部落格發表了一篇文章，談到幾個學術會議的論文審稿過程的不足與爭議，文章末了她提出她心目中合格的 HCI 論文，應該要達到的標準，雖然她談的是她專長的 HCI 領域, 我認為這些標準對於資工領域的研究都是適用的，所以抄錄於後：
- Clear and convincing description of the problem being solved. Why isn't current technology sufficient? How many users are affected? How much does this problem affect their lives?
- How the system works, in enough detail for an independent researcher to build a similar system. Due to the complexities of system building, it is often impossible to specify all the parameters and heuristics being used within a 10-page paper limit. But the paper ought to present enough detail to enable another researcher to build a comparable, if not identical, system.
- Alternative approaches. Why did you choose this particular approach? What other approaches could you have taken instead? What is the design space in which your system represents one point?
- Evidence that the system solves the problem as presented. This does not have to be a user study. Describe situations where the system would be useful and how the system as implemented performs in those scenarios. If users have used the system, what did they think? Were they successful?
- Barriers to use. What would prevent users from adopting the system, and how have they been overcome?
- Limitations of the system. Under what situations does it fail? How can users recover from these failures?