JEMS manual main pages: Home | Recent Changes | Page Index | Site Map | QwikiSyntax
Recently Viewed: Manual do JEMS > Paper review phase

Help Configuring JEMS For The Paper Review Phase:

The review phase requires the following configuration steps, which are explained in details in this page:
adjust the email templates related to the review phase;
include tpc members;
define the review form;
assign reviewers to papers;
notify the reviewers of the assigned papers;
monitor the reviews.

Adjust The Email Templates Related To The Review Phase
The email templates can be edited in: Chair->Configure->Email templates The email templates related with the review phase are:
TPC invitation: message send to people invited through JEMS to be members of the technical program committee;
Review overdue: message send to the reviewers after the deadline for reviewing the papers has passed;
Review reminder: message send to remind the reviewers about the papers assigned to them;
Review assigned to paper: message send to a reviewer when a paper is assigned to him/her;
Review confirmed by reviewer: message send when the reviewer accepts to review a paper assigned to him/her;
Review filled by reviewer: message send to a reviewer after he completes the review form;
Review declined by reviewer: message send when the reviewer refuses to review a paper assigned to him/her;

Include TPC Members

The TPC members can be invited or arbitrarily included in the system.
The invitation page is available at: Chair->People->TPC invitation. The page for arbitrarily inclusion is available at: Chair->People->TPC members.
In the TPC members page:
Attend and Dinner are options to allow the TPC members to indicate if they are going to attend the TPC meeting and dinners. This options are not always valid for all events. In some cases the events do not have a TPC meetings.

Define The Review Form

The review form is composed of review questions and scores. Scores consist of objective options the reviewers have to select from a list and questions are text fields they have to fill in.

Each of the review scores can have a different weight, which will influence the calculation of the final average grade of the paper. Scores can have a weight and a global weight, which is a weight that globally influence the final average grade of the paper.

The classical example to use global weights is the reviewer confidence or experience in the area. We wanted reviewers with more confidence to weight more in the final score than reviewers with less confidence. Since more than one score could be used to calculate the weight of a reviewer, with split this value in the global weight. In the example below I didn’t split the global weight because this is not common.

Example scores configuration in the review form:
Score Description Values Weight Global Weight
1 Originality 1 to 5 0.25 0
2 Technical quality 1 to 3 0.25 0
3 Final recommendation 1 to 2 0.5 0
4 Confidence in the review 1 to 3 0 1


Reviewer Originality Technical quality Final recommendation Confidence in the review
A 1 1 1 3
Average score: ( (1/5) * 0.25 + (1/3) * 0.25 + (1/2) * 0.5 ) * 10 = 3.83
Relative global weight: (3/3) * 1 = 1
Reviewer final score: 3.83 * 1 = 3.83


Reviewer Originality Technical quality Final recommendation Confidence in the review
B 5 3 2 1
Average score: (5/5) * 0.25 + (3/3) * 0.25 + (2/2) * 0.5 ) * 10 = 10
Relative global weight: (1/3) * 1 = 0.33
Reviewer final score: 10 * 0.33 = 3.3

Score for the paper WITHOUT considering the global weight (Avg): 3.83 + 10 / 2 = 6.92
Score for the paper considering the global weight (GAvg): (3.83 + 3.3 ) / (1 + 0.33) = 5.36

Assign Reviewers To Papers

Assign papers to reviewers that speak different languages

Notify The Reviewers

Monitor The Review Process

Esta página em português: Fase de revisao de artigos.