Review Process

The Papers 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 2006 and published in a special issue of ACM Transactions on Graphics.

The committee will categorize papers using a three-phase reviewing process:

1. Each paper is assigned by the Papers Advisory Board to two senior reviewers, who are members of the Papers Committee (50+ members) that has been convened by the Papers Chair. Papers that are inappropriate may be rejected at this stage, before the 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 published previously or to have been submitted simultaneously 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 primary reviewers of that paper, and the third is selected by the secondary reviewer). The primary, secondary, and tertiary reviewers all write full reviews. (A copy of the review form can be found here and reviewer instructions here.) Thus, at least five reviews are written for each paper that has not been rejected during phase one. Two reviews are written by primary 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 allows the authors access to the body of the reviews for their papers (without the scores or recommendations). The authors have four days, from 20 March 2006 through 23 March 2006, to enter rebuttals if they feel that the reviewers have made substantive errors or to answer specific questions posed by the reviewers. The initial rebuttal is confined to 2,000 words in length. Note: The rebuttal period is for addressing factual errors in the reviews, not for getting revised text or new results into the review process. Any such novel material will be ignored by the senior reviewers.

Between the end of the rebuttal submission on 23 March 2006 and the committee meeting, 31 March-2 April 2006, the senior reviewers will confer intensively about the paper and prepare a recommendation for the committee meeting. During that stage, more information, including pictures or video, might be requested by the senior reviewers.

3. The full Papers Committee of senior reviewers meets 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.

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 Papers Committee, and all the additional reviewers they recruit, by submitting only complete, well-edited work.

At the committee meeting, each paper is placed in one of three categories:

Rejected

Conditionally accepted for presentation at SIGGRAPH 2006, possibly pending minor revisions. Conditionally accepted papers undergo a second reviewing process, in which a referee (typically a member of the Papers Committee) verifies that the final version of the paper is acceptable, i.e., that any minor required changes have been made, and that other changes made by the authors, perhaps in response to reviewer comments, have not compromised the paper in any way. This second and final stage determines the final acceptance status of all papers. The referees' decisions are final. Papers that do not satisfy the referees in the second stage of reviewing and that are not provided in camera-ready form by the final deadline will be rejected. Accepted papers will appear in the conference proceedings, which will continue to be published as a special issue of ACM Transactions on Graphics.

Conditionally accepted for publication in ACM Transactions on Graphics, pending major revisions. At the authors' discretion, these papers undergo a second reviewing process, in which an Associate Editor of ACM Transaction on Graphics works with the authors to produce an acceptable final version of their papers. These papers will be published in regular issues of ACM Transactions on Graphics.
Authors will receive email notifications not later than 11:59 pm Pacific Time on Monday, 3 April 2006.