Review Assignments

The reviewer portal lets you view and complete reviews assigned to you by the program committee.

Where to Find It

Me > Reviews

Use Reviews to see talks assigned to you and continue draft reviews.

Reviewer Assignment Workflow

Completing a technical review

A reviewer opens a workshop proposal, checks the abstract and author information, scores each criterion, leaves constructive public feedback for the speaker, adds private scheduling concerns for the committee, and submits before the round closes.

Review Queue

Navigate to Me > Reviews to see your review queue. Each entry shows:

Field	Description
Talk title	The talk to review.
Talk abstract	Brief summary of the talk.
Track	Session track (if assigned).
Format	Talk format (Keynote, Workshop, etc.).
Project	The event project.
Round	Review round name (e.g., "Round 1").
Status	Your review status for this assignment.
Submitted at	When you submitted your review (if completed).

Completing a Review

1. Click a review assignment to open the review detail page.
2. The talk's title is always shown, along with its abstract, description, and author list — unless the project's review visibility setting hides some of these from you (see below).
3. If the talk has a form submission, those fields are shown as well.
4. Score the talk against each review criterion:
   • Numeric scale — a slider between a minimum and maximum, sometimes with labeled endpoints.
   • Rubric — a set of labeled point values you choose from.
   • Yes/No — a simple yes or no answer.
   • Text — a free-text answer.
   • Required criteria must be completed before submission.
5. Add public comments (visible to the speaker only if the project's result visibility is set to show full results).
6. Add private comments (visible only to the committee).
7. Set your confidence level (1--5) indicating how qualified you feel to review this topic.
8. Declare any conflict of interest if applicable.
9. Click Save Draft to save progress, or Submit Review to finalize your review.

Fully blind reviews hide the abstract too

If the project uses full "Blind" review visibility, you won't see the talk's abstract, description, or authors — only its title, any form submission answers, and the criteria you're scoring against. If the project uses "Single Blind," you'll see the abstract and description but not the authors. "Open" review shows everything.

If a talk has more than one review round assigned to you, you'll see a tab for each round. Switch tabs to review and submit each round independently — a round that hasn't opened yet shows a Round not yet open notice, and a closed round shows Round closed and can no longer be changed.

Before submitting a review

• Make sure every required criterion has a score or answer.
• Keep public comments helpful and suitable for the speaker to read.
• Put committee-only concerns in private comments.
• Confirm your conflict declaration and confidence level are accurate.

Declining a Review

If you cannot review a talk:

Decline when you cannot be fair or timely

Decline an assignment if you have a conflict, lack the right expertise, or cannot complete the review before the deadline. A timely decline helps the committee reassign the talk.

1. Click Decline on the assignment.
2. Optionally provide a reason.
3. The program committee is notified.

Declining applies to every round you haven't submitted yet

Declining doesn't just decline the round you're currently viewing — it declines every round of this assignment that you haven't already submitted. If you've already submitted all of your rounds for this talk, there's nothing left to decline.

Review Context

The detail page shows context about the review round:

• Total number of reviewers assigned
• How many reviews have been submitted
• Review and result visibility settings

Connected Feature

Your expertise and conflict declarations help the committee assign appropriate reviews. See Reviewer Profile.

Open related guide