----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reviewer number: 12
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Please place an "X" in the appropriate category for each evaluation. Use
an "X" between two categories if you cannot decide between them.

                            Low     Fair     High   Very High   DK/NA

Originality:                ( )     ( )     (X)     ( )         ( )
Relevance to Conference:    ( )     ( )     ( )     (X)         ( )
Intelligibility to
general SAB audience:       ( )     ( )     ( )     (X)         ( )
Clarity of Presentation:    ( )     ( )     ( )     (X)         ( )
Significance of Results:    ( )     ( )     ( )     (X)         ( )
Technical Soundness:        ( )     ( )     ( )     (X)         ( )

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Summary:    Poor                                      Excellent
           ( )1 ( )2 ( )3 ( )4 ( )5 ( )6 ( )7 ( )8 ( )9 (X)10
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
SPECIFIC COMMENTS TO AUTHOR(S):
(Including suggestions for improving the paper.)

The notion of autopoiesis is absolutely central to the formation
of any theory of living organization. A theory of living organization
lies at the very heart of what artificial life should be about (the
simulation of the deep internal relations that make living organisms
what they are as opposed to simulations of the appearances
of living forms and behaviors).

There is far too little discussion of autopoietic organization within
the alife community, so this is a very important paper in that respect.
It is also important to correct the historical record, because this
particular model was very influential in providing a visual
example, a conceptual image of how an autopoietic system might
work. There are few places where this historical record can be
effectively updated and corrected and the Alife proceedings
volumes are one of the prime places.

Here are some suggestions:

I think it would be useful to reference the wider impact of
autopoietic ideas -- you should reference the Zeleny anthology,
Varela's Biological Autonomy, and possibly John Minger's recent
book. Give people an entry-point into the autopoiesis literature.
It would be useful, in a sentence or two, to outline why
this particular autopoiesis simulation was so important (basically
it was one of the very few serious models of living organization that
had ever been attempted). The details of this omission are important,
yes, but the historical, intellectual context is at least as important
if the artificial life readership is to understand its significance.

Second, does this omission in the original description in any way
change the nature of autopoietic theory? It obviously changes what
an autopoiesis modeller must do, but does it in any way cause us to
update or re-evaluate the more general notions that autopoiesis
entails? I think probably not, but one way or another it would be
worth telling us what you think.

--Peter Cariani

===========================================================================
===========================================================================