How PC chairs and PC members can help improve our process
I discuss some key issues with our review process and give some suggestions for the PC chairs and PC members.
Archive of posts tagged: Conference
Follow-up from MICRO-50 Business Meeting
To all those who attended the MICRO business meeting diversity discussion and/or have followed it on this blog/twitter, we wanted to provide an update to the MICRO and broader computer architecture communities as to the next steps. First off, we want to thank everyone...
MICRO-50 Summary
The 50th Annual International Symposium on Microarchitecture was held earlier this week in Cambridge, Massachusetts. Day One PC Chairs Joel Emer and Daniel Sanchez kicked things off by sharing some data on conference submissions and reviewing. MICRO-50 used a...
Gender Diversity in Computer Architecture
Part One: We’re Just Going to Leave This Here TL;DR – In part one of our series on gender diversity within the subdiscipline of computer architecture, we present some data that provides signal on where our community stands today with respect to gender diversity....
Overwhelming Statistical Evidence That Our Review Process Is Broken
I have been saying that over-positive PC (OPPC) members’ high scores mess up the paper rankings, the coverage of online discussions (lower-score papers are ignored), and the discussion order at the PC meeting. Previously I had analyzed only the pre-rebuttal score distributions but not the impact on the actual outcomes. Now, I have statistical evidence of the impact.
Subscribe
