[PRL] ICFP subreferee reports needed

Mitchell Wand wand at ccs.neu.edu
Mon Apr 21 22:49:37 EDT 2008


Hi, all--

I'm on the ICFP program committee this year, which means that I have to
review 20 papers by May 15.

It's typical for PC committee members to solicit "subreferee" reports from
students and colleagues to help spread the load and get other points of
view.

So: the papers that I've been assigned are at
http://www.ccs.neu.edu/home/wand/private/icfp-08 .

Rather than having me trying to figure out which papers might be interesting
to which people, I'm going to ask you to volunteer to review one or two
papers that you think might be interesting to you.  If I don't get
volunteers, then I'll go back to the other system :)  I signed up for some
of these papers precisely because I figured I could get good subreferee
reports from one or more of you.

Details:

   - For submission number N, there is an abstract at N.html and a
   submission at N.pdf, and occasionally an appendix at N_attachment.pdf. To my
   great surprise, the link from the abstract to the full paper seems to work.
   - Sorry for this crappy organization.  There is a sort of index page
   at assignments.html .  If anyone would like to go through and turn this into
   a usable index page with working links, please feel free to do so, and I'll
   install it.
   - Please let me know which paper or papers you would like to review.
   - Since I have to have my reports done by Thursday 5/15, I would like
   your reports by Monday 5/12.
   - If you are a grad student, don't spend more than two days on a
   paper.
   - Your report needn't be tremendously formal or detailed.  Details on
   formatting requirements, if any, will be forthcoming.
   - Look at my csg711 "Professional Resources" web page for useful
   materials on how to write a referee's report.
   - Yes, I know you have no idea what the rest of the submission pool
   looks like.  But you can assess its quality against other ICFP papers you've
   read in the past, and you can assess internal consistency, clarity, etc.
   - I will be reading and independently assessing each paper myself, so
   don't worry about making mistakes in judgement.  If your report is good,
   I'll rely on it.  If I think you're off base, I'll ignore it.  Either way,
   you'll get a credit as a referee.
   - All these are submissions, so you should keep the contents
   confidential to the lab, unless there is a public copy on the web somewhere.


OK, that sounds way more complicated than it is.  I'm sure I've left
something out; please feel free to ask questions.

Remember, please: refereeing is an important service to the community. The
better the referee reports, the better and the more reliable the entire
conference (and journal) submission process is.  So please do your part!

--Mitch
-------------- next part --------------
HTML attachment scrubbed and removed


More information about the PRL mailing list