2

We recently submitted a paper to a large IEEE conference (ISIT 2019). We have not yet heard back from our reviewers and the dates for the same have passed (it has been a week since). Is this anomalous (delays), or are there situations as per protocol when authors are not notified of their reviews? Is this common to expect in EECS conferences?

Edit: We received an email on the 10th of March that reviews would be provided to authors within the next day; several of our peers have corroborated that they have received the same and responded with rebuttals. The conference website, however does not state this date officially. And for context, the notifications for the conference are due on the 31st of March. The conference website is accessible here.

  • What dates have passed? The notification date? Review due date? – Thomas Mar 19 '19 at 6:56
  • @Thomas The review due date. The final notification is due 10 days from now. – Television Mar 19 '19 at 7:09
  • Have a look at : academia.stackexchange.com/q/58985/72855 – Solar Mike Mar 19 '19 at 7:23
  • In my experience the reviews are due to the PC, not the authors, authors only see the reviews around the notification date (or during the rebuttal phase if the conference has this). – Thomas Mar 19 '19 at 7:49
  • I am confused why there is a "review due date", beyond the internal one for the reviewers, which is normally not disclosed to the public. Can you maybe share the link for the conference website? – lighthouse keeper Mar 19 '19 at 7:50
1

From what you have written, it sounds like this is one of the many computer science conferences that is in the process of shifting to include an opportunity for author rebuttal.

Conferences already often struggle to hit their intended deadlines for response, due to the challenges of wrangling reviewers---most do send responses either on their deadline or within a couple of days, but that often involves frantic activity behind the scenes on the part of the program chairs.

Rebuttal rounds are amplifying this problem, as they are still new for many conferences and haven't yet been properly figured into their planning and scheduling heuristics.

Most likely, then, this is a case of conference organizers struggling with a new process and you happening to be the ones being affected by slow reviewers.

Finally, it is worth noting that they didn't miss the deadline that was promised on the website (March 31st), but only the unannounced "bonus" rebuttal deadline.

Bottom line: the particular situation you are describing is not normal, but also not an unusual failure mode, and an appropriate response is to ping the organizers after the deadline has passed by a few days.

| improve this answer | |

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.
https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/126675/delayed-conference-review-notifications
academia.stackexchange.com
crawl=CC-MAIN-2020-29
144354
application/http; msgtype=response
sha1:NS5GOOUM4RBBQXVIIUT54L6AXQQ2C3B7
<urn:uuid:5d9c3f50-0caf-4f86-85d9-55342fba3486>
2020-07-10T20:07:08Z
151.101.1.69
text/html
sha1:F4IZIEGZVU5DZE4QMYWFYN3POS7PWGDX
<urn:uuid:e9c76a7f-56b2-4cf4-bc67-e44188bd338d>
https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/126675/delayed-conference-review-notifications
response
<urn:uuid:27f88d51-7382-4993-8294-657f32fdccd9>
isPartOf: CC-MAIN-2020-29
publisher: Common Crawl
description: Wide crawl of the web for July 2020
operator: Common Crawl Admin (info@commoncrawl.org)
hostname: ip-10-67-67-219.ec2.internal
software: Apache Nutch 1.17 (modified, https://github.com/commoncrawl/nutch/)
robots: checked via crawler-commons 1.2-SNAPSHOT (https://github.com/crawler-commons/crawler-commons)
format: WARC File Format 1.1
conformsTo: http://iipc.github.io/warc-specifications/specifications/warc-format/warc-1.1/