[Administer] [Review] [Log file] [Change password] [Documentation]

Set Review Guideline for TEST 2007

You can either upload your own guidelines HTML file or use the HTML text in the form below. A reasonable algorithm is to first use the form below, then download the resulting guidelines file and save it locally, and then edit it to suit your needs and upload it back to the server.

HTML Guidelines Form

Use this form to edit the guidelines for reviewers. If you leave empty any of the text-areas, the corresponding section will not appear in the guidelines page. (Please note that newlines in the text below will be replaced by <br/> in the guidelines HTML page.)

TIP: You can use the "Bottom greeting" to add anything you want to the guidelines. Simply insert the following text in the text-area at the bottom of this page.

  <h2>Title-of-new-section</h2>
  whatever-you-want-to-say

Schedule

Assignments

External reviewers

Writing a Report

Overall grades:: 1:; 2:; 3:; 4:; 5:; 6:

Confidence levels:: 1:; 2:; 3:

Technical:: 1:; 2:; 3:

Editorial:: 1:; 2:; 3:

Suitability:: 1:; 2:; 3:

Report contents

Reports will consist
of grades, a weight, and comments. The comments should help the authors
as well as other committee members understand your opinions. Please
don't write one-line reviews and don't over-use committee-only
comments. There is no need to copy the comments to authors in the
committee-only field. The bulk of the report should be visible to the
authors (including summary of contributions, general evaluation, and
specific comments). Authors of rejected papers deserve to know why
their papers were rejected, and we want accepted papers to be improved
based on our comments.
There is no additional structure to the reports that you have to
follow. Here are a few points that you may want to refer to when
organizing and writing your report.
<ul><li> Summary of the problem and paper contribution.
</li><li> What is best about the paper: new ideas, proofs,
simplifications, formalizations, implementation, performance
improvement, new insight, etc.
</li><li> What are the paper weaknesses: lack of
originality, small increment over previous work, unsubstantiated
claims, bad presentation, insufficient discussion of relation with
prior work etc.
</li><li> Target audience: who will be interested in the
results, who will be benefited from its publication in the proceedings,
who will want to hear the talk at the conference.
</li><li> Summary of recommendation: Accept/Reject, main
reason.
</li><li> Detailed technical comments.</li></ul>

Contacting authors

The Discussion Phase

Bottom greeting

[Administer] [Review] [Log file] [Change password] [Documentation]