oakland 2010 program committee meeting
DESCRIPTION
Oakland 2010 Program Committee Meeting. belittle. authentication. dischargeable. bid. electioneer. indecipherable. inheritability . inexactitude. public relations . sanction . vomit-grass. - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
Oakland 2010Program Committee
Meeting
authentication
electioneerdischargeable
indecipherableinheritability
inexactitudepublic relations
sanction vomit-grass
belittle
bid
Avail yourself of these means to communicate to us at seasonable intervals a copy of your journal,
notes & observations of every kind, putting into cipher whatever might do injury if betrayed.
Jefferson’s instructions to Captain Lewis
Review ProcessSubmissions After Round 1 After Round 2 After Round 3 Today
0
50
100
150
200
237
170
96
70 62
Two
Revi
ews
One
mor
e re
view
One
-tw
o m
ore
revi
ews
Sub-mis-sions
Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Today
3024 22
1410
SoK
59
289
268
155
51
3
All Research Submissions (825 reviews)
1: "Hopeless"2: "Strong Reject"3: "Weak Reject"4: "Weak Accept"5: "Accept"6: "Strong Accept"
1
48
108122
48
3
Discuss Papers (330 reviews)
4
40
22
22
18
1All SoK Papers (107 reviews)
Reviewing Lowlights/HighlightsOut of 237+30 research+SoK submissions:
• Number of papers with no “weak reject” (3) or worse reviews:
• Number of papers with no “reject” (2) or worse reviews:
• Total number of reviews with overall merit 6:
0 For every submitted paper, there is at least one PC member who thinks that paper should be rejected!
3+5
3+1 300% improvement from last year!
Plan for Meeting
• Today: (now-~5:30)– Discuss each “discuss” paper– Classify as: accept, reject, revisit– Research papers first, SoK papers
• Tomorrow: (8:30-1pm)– Make final decisions on all papers
Target: Accept ~30 research papers, 2-5 SoK papers2009: 262008: 28
To see the discussion order:Search: order:order
Discussion Lead• Summarize neutrally
what the paper is about• Summarize the non-
attending reviews• Present your own views• Update your review to
reflect any important issues that come up in discussion
Reminders
• No decision is final until meeting closes
• People in the room may have conflicts with other papers: avoid making unnecessary comparisons
• Please don’t leak information that compromises reviewer anonymity
