ASSETS 2008

ASSETS 2008 Author's Rebuttal Procedure

As preparations for ASSETS 2008 continue, the general conference Chair, Dr. Simon Harper and I have decided to propose to enhance the reviewing process by allowing an optional author's rebuttal to the initial set of reviewers' comments.

We hope that this extra step in the process might help resolve instances in which simple clarifications to ambiguities or minor omissions in the submissions, raised by the reviewers, could project some of the papers in their full worth.

The rebuttal process will not allow the authors to submit a new manuscript. It will only allow them to address and clarify points raised by the reviewers, and indicate how such clarifications could be implemented for the reader of the proceedings in the camera-ready paper.

Therefore, the reviewing sequence will be as follows:

1. INITIAL REVIEW
1. Authors upload original manuscript
2. Manuscripts are assigned to reviewers
3. Reviewers post their anonymous comments
2. (OPTIONAL) AUTHOR'S REBUTTAL
1. Authors read initial reviewer's comments
2. Authors post a short rebuttal
3. REVIEW FINALISATION
1. Reviewers read rebuttals (if any) and finalise their suggestions, which may or may not be different from their initial suggestions.
4. REVIEW OUTCOME DETERMINATION AND NOTIFICATION
1. A decision is made regarding the acceptance/rejection of each submission
2. Author's are notified

Continuing with the process utilised for ASSETS 2007, some of the authors of manuscripts not accepted as full papers will be encouraged to submit their work as Poster/Demo short papers (The Poster/Demo deadline will be after the full-paper notification date).

This process should help in reducing the instances in which minor details or communication imprecision prevent worthwhile research endeavours from being assessed in their full impact. Furthermore, the added effort implicit in the rebuttal stage should be minimised by performing the reviewing process on a submission/reviewing system that fully supports this stage.