Instructions for ICLC Reviewers


Dear ICLC Reviewer:

This message contains information and guidelines for reviewing the ICLC abstracts recently sent to you as well as technical instructions for submitting your review via computer. The due date for reviews is January 15, 2001.

The reviewing form on the web will be ready by 6:00 p.m. (1800 Greenwich Mean Time) on Dec. 14. These instructions will be posted by that time to the site for your convenience.



There were 330 abstracts submitted. From these, 185 general session talks and 30 poster presentations will be selected. The abstracts will be ranked by averaged reviewer results. The top 185 submissions will be accepted as general session papers (unless the submitter specified 'poster only', in which case they move to the next on the list). The poster acceptances will be taken from the next 30 on the list (unless the submitter specified 'general session only'). Thus about 56% of the total submissions will be accepted for the general session, and about 65% accepted as either general session paper or poster.

(There will be an alternates list.)

We hope that the above figures help you in deciding how selective to be in your reviewing. Not all promising papers can be accepted, and not all papers that do not meet the highest standards for abstracts should be rejected.

Please give poor quality abstracts a 1 or 2 even if you are interested in the topic.



The criteria for reviewing, publicized in the abstracts guidelines, are the following:

Topic appropriate/of interest for ICLC
"New Knowledge" contributed by the work
Data: Sources specified; examples given to illustrate points made
Persuasiveness of argumentation
Statement of results/conclusions
Overall quality of the work as seen from abstract

Reviewers will give a score from 1-5 for each of these criteria. 5 is the best score. (Remember: More is Good.)

Here are some guidelines for what the scores mean:

5 = Definitely accept
4 = Accept
3 = Ok to accept, although not the best
2 = Should probably not accept
1 = Do not accept

Short comments on an abstract are allowed if desired, and will be used in cases of very close or equal rankings.



There is a website that will link you to a reviewing form for submitting scores. If you cannot access the website, then you can submit your scores via email; see instructions below.



Access the site and link to the reviewing form. You will then see the following:

ICLC Abstract Review Submission Page Reviewer's Surname: _______
First Three Words
of Abstract title: _____________________ Abstract Number: __ (3 digits max) Topic: __ (1=lowest ... 5=highest) New Knowledge: __ (1=lowest ... 5=highest) Data/Examples: __ (1=lowest ... 5=highest) Argumentation: __ (1=lowest ... 5=highest) Results/Conclusions: __ (1=lowest ... 5=highest) Overall Quality: __ (1=lowest ... 5=highest) Comments if any: Click on the "Submit" button to send your scores.

Instead of blanks/underscores as above, the form will have empty boxes. Fill in the relevant boxes, assigning a score for each judging criterion. (Note that the criteria are abbreviated; for the full wording, see above under "Reviewer Ratings".)

Your name, the abstract number and the first 3 words of the abstract's title are crucial information; you must fill them in for the review to count. If you leave any of the criteria boxes blank, it will be assigned a zero, so doing this will lower the score for that abstract.

Click on the Submit button to send that review. You will get a confirmation that your review has been sent. (You cannot go back and change it.) Each review must be submitted individually. So to get to the next review form, click the Back button on your browser. It will take you to your previous review. Click the Clear button to empty the form and start the process over.



We strongly prefer that scores be submitted via the webform (for ease of processing at our end). If you cannot access the web, you can submit the scores by email, following the instructions given here.

For each abstract, make yourself a template out of the following.

Reviewer's Surname:   
First Three Words
   of Abstract title: 
Abstract Number:      
New Knowledge:
Overall Quality:

Comments if any: (maximum 5 lines)

You can copy the above template 10 times (or however many abstracts you have), leaving several blank lines between, to put all your ratings in one file. Then fill in the information required. Remember that 5 is the best score.

Please be sure to follow this template exactly, so that the review will be processed accurately.

Once the information and scores for each abstract are filled in, send the results to



If you have any difficulties, we will do our best to troubleshoot. Contact us at or, preferably after January 2, 2001. (We cannot guarantee that we can access our email or be able to help you before then.)

Thank you once again for being a reviewer for ICLC 2001.

Michel Achard and Suzanne Kemmer
On behalf of the ICLC 2001 Organizers

Click here to go back to ICLC Instructions for Reviewers and Reviewing Form main page.