A peer-reviewed journal such as JM³ exists because of the dedication of a large number of people, beginning of course with the authors, then through the efforts of our volunteer editors and the professional staff at SPIE, and finally with the often unheralded help of our reviewers. At JM³, we have adapted the most common form of peer-reviewing manuscripts, using volunteer reviewers who remain anonymous by design.¹ Now is my chance to recognize those reviewers for the vital role that they play.

As an author and reviewer myself, I appreciate the level of time, effort, and professionalism that goes into a thoughtful review. Since typically two selfless volunteers have reviewed each paper I have ever published in a journal, I consider it my duty to give back by reviewing at least two papers for every one that I publish. Many other authors also understand that performing reviews is a community service, giving back to a process that we also benefit from.

Over three hundred people reviewed manuscripts for JM³ last year. A list of all of those reviewers is found at the end of this issue’s print edition and in the online issue. I thank them all for their dedicated time and service to our community.

But some reviewers have gone above and beyond the call of duty. Our top performers reviewed three or more JM³ manuscripts last year, accepted nearly all review requests, and completed their reviews within an average of 14 days of the request or less. The associate editors working with them ranked their reviews as either good or excellent. These are the top JM³ reviewers of 2015:

I hope that everyone who enjoys and appreciates this journal will find a chance to thank these reviewers for the gift of their time and expertise. And while this short list must use an arbitrary cut-off, I also appreciate the many other reviewers just as deserving of praise who are not listed here.