Peer reviews: What would be the best model? [From the Editor]

It is argued that the current peer-review system has some drawbacks - this does not only apply to conference papers but also to journal submissions. The major challenge is to find experienced reviewers who would be able to complete reviews in the short time frame provided. There is no doubt that the shorter the review time allocated to experts is, the better it is for the authors and the journals in general; every one of us would like to see his or her fresh, original ideas published as soon as possible, and every editor wishes a minimum turnaround time of paper reviews. The challenge for editors is therefore to secure comprehensive reviews so as to make an expert decision, acceptable to the authors, and in the shortest amount of time. A central question has always been a topic of discussion at many editorial board meetings this Editor has attended over the years: "How can one secure high-quality reviews by experienced researchers?" It is concluded that we will continue to struggle to find three reviewers for each single submitted paper and, in a situation like ICASSP 2014, with a number of over 3,500 submissions, simple mathematics will show that this is an overwhelming task for all involved. The Editor takes this opportunity to wholeheartedly thank all of the colleagues and friends who are always willing to help review articles for IEEE Signal Processing Magazine.