« Back to Summary
What model do you prefer for assigning area chairs to papers? (multiple selections possible)
#Response DateI have the following alternative proposal:
1Jun 10, 2010 7:05 PMNo opinion. All past year's ICML reviews have been fine with me.
2Jun 10, 2010 7:06 PMIn general the first two options are fine but there is one very big caveat: there should be the ability for the authors to write in their own keywords. A certain (newish) topic did not have a keyword, and so papers on it keep getting reviewer mismatch.
3Jun 10, 2010 8:39 PMthere is no best one. it dependes on the quality of reviews.
4Jun 11, 2010 4:42 AMThis year's process in not transparent enough to compare to my previous experiences.
5Jun 11, 2010 8:55 AMOne negative point of the publicity of area chairs is that I encountered a paper as a reviewer at ECML which was an exact copy of a rejected ICML paper. I reposted the given reviews as my review and probably gave away my identity that way. (I might have lost some friends ... :-))
6Jun 12, 2010 10:57 AMLike this year, but without making the assigment of area chairs to key words public.