High Quality Review
As an IEEE INFOCOM 2014 reviewer, your reviews and discussion participation are crucial in determining the ultimate quality of the conference.
A simple way to think about the
reviewer duties is to think reciprocally about what you expect as an
author of a paper from a peer in the community: a good, substantive
review, a decision that is well-founded on the consensus of the
reviews and good feedback. This is what we expect from reviewers.
The element of randomness in the process cannot be eliminated, but
we want to control it while biasing it towards merit and providing
good feedback to authors. Providing high quality reviews is by far
the most important contribution of a reviewer.
- Basic Quantity/Quality:
Reviews of length shorter than 100 words will generate an
automated EDAS feedback to you requesting more input.
- Kindly do not
cut-and-paste the same information in different categories when
this happens: please enter feedback that will be useful to
authors.
- In particular, if any of
the papers are reviewed with the help of students, we expect the
reviewer to provide oversight and clarity and personally enter
the reviews into the EDAS system.
- In the TPC meeting, a
review having a score of 5 with a short unsubstantiated review
will be discounted, and the other dissenting reviews may
override the higher score if they are more substantive.
- So, if you want your
reviews to matter in TPC discussions, please enter substantive,
high quality reviews.
