[PRL] ESOP Sub-refereeing Requests
Mitchell Wand
wand at ccs.neu.edu
Wed Nov 5 10:37:17 EST 2003
I'm on the Program Committee for ESOP '04. I've got 18 papers to
referee, with reports due on 12/1. Consequently, I'm hoping to make
greater use of the sub-refereeing process than I have in the past.
I'm about to send out a bunch of subreferee requests. For those of
you who have not done this before, here are some ground rules:
1. I know everybody is busy. You are free to either accept or
decline the assignment. I've assigned papers largely because I
think you'll be interested in them.
2. I've made no effort to make distribute the papers evenly. Some
people are matched with as many as 4 papers, and others have not
been matched with any. Feel free to work on however many papers
you'd like (including 0, though I'd prefer 1 :-). If I haven't
assigned you a paper, and you'd like to participate in the
process, let me know and I'm sure we can work something out :)
3. I do not expect you to devote more than 1 day to each paper you
review. Normally the report will be about 3/4 page, not counting
lists of specific comments (typos, confusing points, etc.)
4. Your review is a report to me, not to the conference, so don't get
bent out of shape about accept/reject recommendations. You only
see one or two papers, but I get to see a wider pool, so I can
rank them accordingly. I will use your input in formulating my
recommendation. I will use my judgement about what material to
forward to the PC and the author. In general, my plan is to
include all of what you write in "Comments for the author" under
the heading "A subreferee says: ... :
In other conferences, subreferees are acknowledged in the
proceedings; I don't know what the practice is at ESOP.
5. If you have not done a referee's report before, look at the
materials by Ian Parberry and Alan Jay Smith on refereeing,
available from the csg711 "Professional Resources" page.
6. Please use the reporting format below.
Thanks in advance for your help,
--Mitch
=================================================================
REVIEW FORM FOR ESOP 2004
=================================================================
Paper Number (first 3 digits of filename):
Authors:
Title:
Program Committee Member: MW
Subreviewer:
Score: Strong accept(5)
Weak accept(4)
Neutral(3)
Weak reject(2)
Strong reject(1)
Out of scope(0)
Confidence: High(3)
Medium(2)
Low(1)
Comments for MW's eyes only:
Comments for MW and PC's eyes only (not author):
Detailed Comments for Author(s):
(This section will be sent to the corresponding author.)
=========================================================================
More information about the PRL
mailing list