ECCV 2012 Review process

The process is traditional but for two main innovations:   We eliminated the in-person plenary AC meeting (with some regret). Those meetings have become too big and expensive, and much of the feedback has been that the most valuable part of the meeting is the discussion in pairs.  Having successfully experimented with Area Chair (AC) triplets for BMVC 2011,  we replaced the meeting with AC triplets who will meet in person (or online) and produce ranked lists of ~90 papers. The final consolidation of the lists will be done by the PCs in consultation with the ACs.

Additional features/innovations

  1. We will use the unique author ID systems provided by Microsoft/Google to identify authors and reviewers, avoiding problems with multiple individuals having the same name.     This data will also inform conflict identification.  We will use the UToronto topic modelling software to provide reviewer suggestions to ACs.
  2. ACs prepare a “draft consolidation” before the authors’ rebuttal.   This allows the authors to focus on issues that the AC considers important, and helps to ensure that new information is not introduced into the reviews after the rebuttal.
  3. The review scores now explicitly reflect that oral papers have higher scores.  The old system led to inconsistent scoring: reviewers who obey the rubric will assign “definite accept” (i.e. score=1) to a clear poster; reviewers who believe the overall rating is a score will give score=1 only to orals.


DATE (2012) action/event Notes
Feb 2012 or before Every researcher who wishes to be considered for reviewing or submission registers with Google Scholar & Microsoft Academic, and submits his/her unique ID
Each AC triplet arranges two meetings, one in the period 13-21 March, one in the period 29 May-10 June.
5 March 2012 EVENT: authors submit
5-12 March PC assigns papers to AC triplets, possibly tweaking triplet partition
12 March EVENT: papers to ACs
12-22 March ACs meet and, suggest 7+ reviewers / paper
22 March EVENT: ACs supply reviewer proposals
22-26 March PC makes final reviewer assignment Matching suggestions, conflicts, load balancing
4 April EVENT: Papers to reviewers
4 April – 11 May Reviewers write reviews Review period
11 May DEADLINE: Return reviews
11-21 May ACs go over reviews, initiate discussions
21 May EVENT:
Reviews to authors
21-28 May Authors write rebuttals
28 May EVENT: Authors submit rebuttals
28 May – 11 June ACs read rebuttals, update consolidation reports, rank their 90 papers, produce thresholds for oral and poster
11-17 June PC looks at consolidations, spot problems, interact with AC triplets to obtain missing info.
Combine lists, suggests shifts of thresholds to AC triples if needed.  Finalizes oral/poster/reject on agreement of ACs.
17 June EVENT: ACs finalize consolidations
PCs check consolidations
< 25 June EVENT: Author notification

One thought on “ECCV 2012 Review process

  1. Pingback: MICC - Media Integration and Communication Center