RSS Board >> recruiting_reviewers

Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

Both sides previous revisionPrevious revision
Next revision		Previous revision
recruiting_reviewers [2010/10/18 23:52] – nickroyrecruiting_reviewers [2011/02/26 14:54] (current) – external edit 127.0.0.1
Line 1: Line 1:
 [[:home|Home]]\\ [[:home|Home]]\\
-[[:ac_info|Up]]+[[:acinfo|Up]]
  
 Don't forget to fill in the blanks after "Dear ," and "in the area of ." And don't forget to sign it too.  Don't forget to fill in the blanks after "Dear ," and "in the area of ." And don't forget to sign it too. 
 +
 +-----
  
 Dear , Dear ,
Line 9: Line 11:
 submissions.  submissions. 
  
-Would you be willing to review papers in this area for AAAI-07? +Would you be willing to review papers in this area for RSS 11? 
  
-Note 1: I would be counting on you to review several papers in the area of .+I would be counting on you to review several papers in the area of .
  
-Note 2: If you have already been contacted by another area chair and agreed to review for them, do not say "yes" to me unless you want a double reviewing load. +( And if you have already been contacted by another area chair and agreed to review for them, do not say "yes" to me unless you want a double reviewing load.)
  
 The program chair (Nick Roy) is planning on an absolute worst case of 5 papers per reviewer. (The worst case scenario is 300 submissions; RSS 2010 had 224 submissions, a 40% growth from 2009). The program chair (Nick Roy) is planning on an absolute worst case of 5 papers per reviewer. (The worst case scenario is 300 submissions; RSS 2010 had 224 submissions, a 40% growth from 2009).
  
-At the end of this message is the planned procedure and timeline for the review process.  The review process is fairly tight, so it is vital that you respect the deadlines.  I will also be counting on you to write a high quality review and to be active in the discussions of the papers.  If you have any questions regarding the responsibilities of +At the end of this message is the timeline for the review process.  The review process is fairly tight, so it is vital that you respect the deadlines. I will also be counting on you to write a high quality review and to be active in the discussions of the papers.  If you have any questions regarding the responsibilities of a PC member, please get in touch.
-a PC member, please get in touch.+
  
 Hopefully, your experiences with RSS in the last couple of years means that you know that the reviewing process is enjoyable, given the review discussion and rebuttal phases. Hopefully, your experiences with RSS in the last couple of years means that you know that the reviewing process is enjoyable, given the review discussion and rebuttal phases.
Line 24: Line 25:
 Thanks, Thanks,
  
-The key dates are: += = = = = = = = = = \\ 
- +The key dates are:\\ 
-Jan 10  Abstracts due += = = = = = = = = = \\ 
-Jan 17  Paper deadline +Jan 10  Abstracts due\\ 
-Jan 30  Reviews are assigned +Jan 17  Paper deadline\\ 
-Feb 28  Reviews due, discussion begins +Jan 30  Reviews are assigned\\ 
-Mar 7   Discussion ends +Feb 28  Reviews due, discussion begins\\ 
-Mar 7   Author rebuttal begins +Mar 7   Discussion ends\\ 
-Mar 14  Author rebuttal ends, reviewers answer to rebuttals +Mar 7   Author rebuttal begins\\ 
-Mar 21  Discussion period ends +Mar 14  Author rebuttal ends, reviewers answer to rebuttals\\ 
-Apr 15  Acceptance announced +Mar 21  Discussion period ends\\ 
-Jun 27  RSS in Los Angeles +Apr 15  Acceptance announced\\ 
 +Jun 27  RSS in Los Angeles \\
  
recruiting_reviewers.1287460376.txt.gz · Last modified: 2011/02/26 14:54 (external edit)