hi i have normalised down to BCNF i think and was woundering if someone could check it for me please

UNF

Paper No
Paper Title
Decision
Topic
Authors Name
Email
Phone
Reviewers Name
Relevance
Originality
Technical Merit
Overall Mark
Copyright Ok
Received Ok
Length Ok
Format Ok

1st Normal Form

Paper No (PK)
Paper Title
Decision
Topic
Copyright Ok
Received Ok
Length Ok
Format Ok

Paper No(PK)
Authors Name(PK)
Email
Phone

Paper No(PK)
Reviewers Name(PK)
Relevance
Originality
Technical Merit

2nd Normal Form

Paper No (PK)
Paper Title
Decision
Topic
Copyright Ok
Received Ok
Length Ok
Format Ok

Paper No(PK)
Authors Name(PK)
Email
Phone

Paper No(PK)
Reviewers Name(PK)
Relevance
Originality
Technical Merit

Paper No(FK)
Authors Name(FK)


3rd and BCNF are the same

On the 2NF, would a Topic table be in order? Also, could there be a M:M relationship between reviewers and papers? Considering the paper, the review, and the reviewer to be entities, Paper would have 1:M with Review and then Review would have 1:M with Reviewer. Something like that.

Here's what you have created. I developed the model using dbdesigner4. It is free to download.

Does the model look right?

that seems ok to me

is it wrong?????

You have a model which is giving conflicting relationships.

One paper can have many authors.

Many papers can have many authors.

One paper can have many reviewers.

The many to many relationship makes the most sense.