Configuration of reviewing process

How does the reviewing of papers work and what contexts are important?

The reviewing of papers (abstracts, manuscripts) in Converia can be conducted as a multi-stage process. The Converia standard procedure assumes an reviewing upon the completion of submission.

After submission Converia allows for the evaluation of papers by external reviewers: They gain access to the papers assigned to them through a frontend login, where they can review each paper. The reviewing criteria by which the reviewers are to judge are configured in the backend. Additionally, various visibility and permission settings for the reviewers can be adjusted, such as the ability to leave messages, view other reviewers or authors, or implement strict double-blind settings to ensure maximum anonymity.

After the reviewers' evaluation, the procedures in Converia involve the final review by the responsible parties: the scientific or program committee. This final review is conducted in the backend. For this purpose, restricted backend access may be granted to the responsible parties if they do not already have it. In the final review a final decision is made for each paper based on the external reviews.

In the following last step, the authors are informed about the reviewing results via email. Accepted papers can subsequently be scheduled in the conference planner for inclusion in the program. Authors can upload presentations for on-site use, or there may be another submission stage following the acceptance of abstracts, namely the manuscript submission.

These standard processes can be modified to a certain extent. For instance, papers can be finally evaluated without external reviewers, or the evaluation can occur simultaneously with the submission, and so on. However, altering the processes may affect the usability features associated with the standard processes.

The following pages provide detailed explanations of the prerequisites, settings, and individual steps of the paper reviewing.