AC Agenda Meeting Process

Hello Associate Chairs.

We now have the final details for you, available via a web link. Please print these out, read them, and take them with you to the meeting. You will get a nicer copy if you click the print tab on the web page and then select print.

The ACM CHI PC Meeting Agenda

  • Details what is happening over the course of the days

The ACM CHI PC Meeting Process Description

  • Details the plenary and sub-committee deliberation process

Please review these documents well before next week. We are trying to ensure a consistent review deliberation process across the committees, so we strongly prefer you to know and follow a common process rather than inventing your own.

All other things sent out

  • Contains most other group emails we have sent you , in case you are missing something

Flagging Auto-Reject Papers for Discussion

To remind you, 1st ACs can can flag an auto-reject paper (score <= 2.7, stand. dev. <=1.0) for discussion if you think there is an issue with its reviewing that suggest it should be reconsidered for acceptance. To do this:

  • Go to your list of papers you are handling in PCS
  • Click on your review (i.e., Submit your Report button)
  • Near the bottom of the form is a "To be Discussed at PC Meeting" section. Click the Discuss this submission button.

Please try to get this done soon, as it will help us prepare the final spreadsheets for the meeting.

Nominating Best Papers

As above, except all can do this. The Best Paper Nomination is about 2/3rds down the page. You should check the box and include a brief paragraph detailing why it deserves this nomination (the Best Papers Committee will need to see this). Please try to get this done soon, as it will help us prepare the final spreadsheets for the meeting.

Other reminders

  • Bring a copy of all papers (except auto-rejected ones) you are handling (AC and 2nd AC), as you may have to give this to others to read
  • Bring a copy (1 per page) of the Submission summary page that shows the title, authors and abstract (except auto-rejected ones) as we will be taping accepted ones to the wall for organizing them into sessions.
  • Bring a copy of your meta-review in case something goes wrong (or save it to your laptop)
  • Bring a printout of the list of the papers you are handling, where it -- summarizes its score,
    • if you or a reviewer wanted to nominated it for best paper
    • if the included video (if any) is suitable for the video showcase, etc.

You can use this information to check and correct the view shown at the sub-committee meeting.

If you have any questions about these documents, let us know immediately.
Saul Greenberg and Scott Hudson