2017 ACL 2017:ACs to Rank
From Admin Wiki
Revision as of 11:26, 14 August 2017 by Knmnyn (Created page with "Sent to '''Track Chairs'''. <nowiki> Subject: [ACL 2017] Area Chairs: Ranking papers, naughty/nice reviewers by Mar 28 </nowiki> <pre> Dear [reviewerFirstName] [reviewerLas...")
Sent to Track Chairs.
Subject: [ACL 2017] Area Chairs: Ranking papers, naughty/nice reviewers by Mar 28
Dear [reviewerFirstName] [reviewerLastName]: This is the final stretch! We hope to receive two things from you in the next 5 days (due Mar 28, but the sooner, the better). 1. Ranked list of papers. We need separate short and long paper recommendations. We'd like you to categorize papers into: 1. strong accept, 2. accept but ok to reject, and 3. reject. We also further need your help in giving a short explanation of your recommendation, mandatory for the 2. accept but ok to reject class, but you're welcomed to annotate others (e.g., potential outstanding paper). We also need your recommendation on oral vs. poster format in a separate column. For papers with COIs, list them in the ranking as having COI. Each AC should separately provide recommendations on the same axes for accept/reject, poster/oral for the submissions they don't have COI for. 2. Reviewer status. Here's when we get to decide who was naughty and who was nice. Please compile a list through your meta AC on whom you think did great reviewing (prompt, careful, precise, considered, backed with evidence, courteous and comprehensive) and whom you think we should not invite back from your pool of reviewers (and a short reason for it). How can you submit this? The easiest way is to open our template Google spreadsheet ( http://bit.ly/2nJEfZB ) and duplicate a copy for your area's use. Share it with Min and Regina and modify the three worksheets (long, short, reviewers) to encompass your rankings. For COIs, each area's Meta AC can decide whether to enter the COI information by themselves (disallowing other ACs with any COI from viewing the worksheet), or to have each AC email their ranking directly to the PC co-chairs Best to each AC team in this final stretch! Try to push papers towards either an accept or reject where you think your decision is defensible. It should be easier work with the lengthened dialogue and author response that we can use to better judge each submission. Cheers, Regina and Min P.S. Poster vs. Oral? Many of us have our own ideas about this and this can be a weighty decision to make. This will be the subject of another blog post to be put up shortly so that it can be discussed in public. -- ACL 2017 Long - https://www.softconf.com/acl2017/papers ACL 2017 Short - https://www.softconf.com/acl2017/shortpapers