 |
[Review Process]
A papers selection committee and a set of reviewers, both consisting of
recognized experts, will judge submitted papers. The committee will
select papers to be presented at SIGGRAPH 2003 and published in the
Conference Proceedings.
Papers undergo a three-phase reviewing process:
1. Each paper is assigned
by the Papers Advisory Board to two senior reviewers, who are members
of the selection committee (30-40 members) that has been convened by the
Papers chair. Papers that are inappropriate may be rejected at this
stage, before the selection committee meets to review submitted
papers. A paper may be designated as inappropriate because it solves a
problem already solved, or is unaware of important prior work on the
same problem and doesn't address how it is different, or has no
evaluation via proof, experiment, or analysis, or is solving a problem
sufficiently minor that the senior reviewers do not believe that it
belongs in the program. Papers will also be rejected at this stage if
they are discovered to have been submitted to another conference or
journal.
2. Each paper is distributed to three or more
additional experts. Two of them are selected by one of the senior
reviewers of that paper (the primary reviewer), and the third is
selected by the other senior reviewer (the secondary reviewer). The
senior, secondary, and tertiary reviewers all write a full review. At least five reviews are thus
written for each paper that has not been rejected during phase one. Two
reviews are written by senior reviewers who know the identities of the
authors of the paper, and three or more are written by additional
reviewers who do not.
After all reviews are complete, the review system will allow the
authors access to the body of the reviews for their papers (without the
scores or recommendations). The authors have three days to enter rebuttals if they feel that the reviewers have made substantive
errors.
3. The full selection committee of senior reviewers meets in March 2003 to
determine acceptance or rejection of each paper. In cases where the
reviews do not clearly indicate either acceptance or rejection,
additional committee members may read the paper, and their evaluations
will be taken into account in the decision.
All papers submitted to SIGGRAPH 2003 must be original, unpublished
work. Any paper that has been previously published in substantially
similar form by any other conference or in any other journal will be
automatically rejected, as will papers that are simultaneously
submitted to SIGGRAPH 2003 and to any other conference or journal.
We require that all submitted papers be formatted for publication;
reviewers will be instructed to judge the papers as they are
submitted. Please respect the substantial volunteer efforts of the
selection committee, and all the additional reviewers they recruit, by
submitting only complete, well-edited work.
At the committee meeting, each paper will be either conditionally
accepted, conditionally accepted with minor changes, or rejected by the
committee. The two kinds of conditionally accepted papers will undergo
a second "refereeing" process, in which a referee (a member of the
committee or other expert appointed by the Papers Chair) verifies that
a final version of the paper is either substantially the same (in the
case of conditionally accepted papers) or has been altered according to
the required changes (in the case of conditionally
accepted-with-minor-changes papers). In both cases, authors may choose
to incorporate other suggestions from the reviewers. The referee will
verify that such changes are acceptable. This second and final stage
determines the final acceptance status of all papers. The referee's
decision is final. Papers that do not satisfy the referee are
rejected.
|
|
|
|
|
