Example of Two conflicting reviews Actual contents of the review of a paper submitted to the international gas turbine institute annual conference(Turbo Expo Reviewer #1: The authors are to be congratulated on an excellent use of CFD [computational fluid dynamics. The work leads to increased understanding of a physical flow mechanism and is shown to be consistent with experimental results.” Reviewer #2: The authors attempted to study the upstream unsteady effects on rotor tip clearance flow..... The CFD model (wake rotor) used by the authors is not adequate to represent the true multi-blade row situation, especially when the blade row gap is smallExample of Two Conflicting Reviews • Actual contents of the review of a paper submitted to the International Gas Turbine Institute annual conference (Turbo Expo). – Reviewer #1: “The authors are to be congratulated on an excellent use of CFD [computational fluid dynamics]. The work leads to increased understanding of a physical flow mechanism and is shown to be consistent with experimental results.” – Reviewer #2: “The authors attempted to study the upstream unsteady effects on rotor tip clearance flow.............The CFD model (wake + rotor) used by the authors is not adequate to represent the true multi-blade row situation, especially when the blade row gap is small