Dear Author

We are pleased to inform you that your submission to the IADIS Applied Computing 2010 (AC 2010)
Conference has been accepted as a "Full Paper".

Please, make the suggested corrections to your paper (see details below), use the correct format available at
http://www.computing-conf.org/submissions.asp (very important: if this format is not followed we cannot
accept your contribution and it won't be published in the proceedings). Make sure that your final
submission has the number of pages allowed for this category which is 8 pages (additional pages up to 4
will be charged as specified in the registration form). Also note that your final submission must be a
WORD file since proceedings are produced in WORD,

Also, login to your author area available at http://www.computing-

conf.org/confman_ac2010/author_menu.asp with your login and password, and
1 - submit the final version - in word or rtf version please until 6 September 2010 (please submit from your
author area link only),
2 - access the copyright form, fill it out and send it in order for your contribution to be published (until 6
September 2010),
3 - print an invitation letter (if required) for you or any of your co-authors,
4 - register for the conference (deadline for this procedure is also 6 September 2010 - if not registered the
paper won't be published in the proceedings. This deadline also corresponds to the early registration rates
for this call - select the early registration option from the rates part of the registration form),
5 - View hotel information and book hotel at http://www.computing-conf.org/hotel.asp ,
6 - Check the guidelines for presenters available at http://www.computing-conf.org/guidelines.asp .

Hope to see you in Timisoara, Romania in October.

For any information please contact us. Thank you.

Best regards,

Hans Weghorn, BW Cooperative State University Stuttgart, Germany

IADIS AC 2010 Program Chair

Pedro Isaías, Universidade Aberta (Portuguese Open University), Portugal

Radu Vasiu, "Politehnica" University of Timisoara, Romania
IADIS AC 2010 Co-Chairs

NOTE: This e-mail is being sent to all co-authors of this submission.

***********************

Please consider the following data for your final submission (using the link above):

Your Login is: burairah@utem.edu.my

Your password is: 79784

***********************
Paper Title: Exam Timetabling Using Graph Colouring Approach

Submission code: 60

Evaluation Results:

Originality: 6 - Good
Significance: 6 - Good
Technical: 6 - Good
Relevance: 6 - Good
Classification: 7 - Excellent
Comments: The complexity of the problem arises due to some reasons such as dual academic calendar,
increasing student enrolments, limitations of resources, etc. Constraints involved in this problem can be
divided into two categories which are hard constraints and soft constraints.
Positive Points: Normally, exam timetable will satisfy all hard constraints but the problem is how to
measure that it is a good timetable. Thus, soft constraints will be used as the measurement which will
evaluate either the timetable is good and practical or not. Soft constraints can be considered as preferences
which will fulfill some of the user requirements to maximize the perfection of the timetable.
Negative Points: None.

Originality: 6 - Good
Significance: 6 - Good
Technical: 6 - Good
Relevance: 6 - Good
Classification: 6 - Good
Comments: The author present an approach for the exam timetabling problem. The paper is well-written.
The paper is adequate for the conference.

Originality: 2 - Weak
Significance: 5 - Average
Technical: 4 - Neutral
Relevance: 3 - Not Very Good
Classification: 4 - Neutral
Comments: The authors provide an approach for scheduling exams within a particular university and
acheive good results as compared to an existing manual approach. For example, they acheive a reduction
in overall exam duration (in days).
Positive Points: 1) The authors use almost all of the available 8 pages for their full paper submission.
2) It is good that colours were labeled in Figure 1. The authors should do this for Table 3 as well. This
will aid colour blind readers understand which colours are which.
3) The authors list a web-based exam timetable as a future work. They may wish to investigate already
existing software. For example, a search using the keywords "exam scheduling software" within
the Google search engine lists many.
Negative Points: 1) The authors provide an algorithm to automate an existing manual
exam scheduling process. However, the authors do not compare with
already published exam scheduling literature.
2) The authors should provide a high level algorithm or figure
that describes (at a summary level) what their proposed approach
entails. The body of the text may then refer to this algorithm
or figure when discussing implementation details.
3) Figure 2 has some truncated nodes. i.e. some parts of the graph
are missing. Please fix this.
 4) The text above figure 1 state "colouring should be four". But if I
have understood correctly, shouldn't it be "five"?
5) The published guidelines should be adhered to.
http://www.computing-conf.org/submissions.asp
For example:
- number of keywords should be >= 6
- references should be alphabetical
- Tables should be named "Table X. text"
- Figures should be named "Figure X. text"
- Section numbering should be corrected.

Originality: 4 - Neutral
Significance: 6 - Good
Technical: 5 - Average
Relevance: 5 - Average
Classification: 3 - Not Very Good
Comments: This paper is interesting because it deals with a today issue: exam timetable. The experiments
have been done in a real context => Centre for Foundation studies and Extension Education (FOSEE).
The results are quite good but no results are given related to the time required to the computation.
The state of the art is unfortunately quite limited and no position of the paper is given regarding the
litterature. Even if methods are based on heuristics, authors should compare their approach with available
existing works. For instance, Burke et al. worked on genetic algorithm but no comparison is given.
The proposed context seems to have limited constraints that limits the relevance of the proposed approach
because I am wondering if this approach can be applied in a more general context with more constraints.

A Genetic Algorithm Based University Timetabling System (1994)

Edmund Burke , David Elliman , Rupert Weare
East-West Conference on Computer Technologies in Education, Crimea, Ukraine
Positive Points: + A real application
+ Good results in the proposed context
+ Comparison with manual composition of time table
Negative Points: - the whole approach is mainly based on heuristics but we do not see really the
caracteristics of each proposed methods.
- No discussion related to classic methods (why do they not allow users to obtain a good) and no arguments
are given stating that existing approaches are too limited to be applied in the proposed context.
- The hard and soft conditions seems to be quite simple. In our University, the constraints are more
numerous and it is more difficult to take it into account.
- Required time is not discussed

Originality: 5 - Average
Significance: 6 - Good
Technical: 6 - Good
Relevance: 6 - Good
Classification: 6 - Good
Comments: This paper deals with the exam timetabling problem (period selection, room selection).
The author method is based on graph colouring.

The paper is clear and it has a good presentation.

More experiment results may be presented.