Rebuttals

A few conferences such as AAMAS provide reviews before the final decision is made and give authors a chance to comment on the reviews. This seems like some extra work but might be very worthwhile. Another possibility might be to let reviewers pose explicit questions to authors, asking for clarifications before the final decision, as suggested in Thoughts on How to Improve Reviews by Paul Francis.

-- FredDouglis - 01 Apr 2008

Talking to other grad students about this I've heard a lot about SIGGRAPH's process and they have a short, but helpful discussion of what a rebuttal should look like. You can find it here.

-- ColinDixon - 15 Apr 2008

I have seen the rebuttal process change only a few reject and accept decisions, but these decisions are important and it has the following additional benefits. Reviewers submit their reviews before the rebuttal period, instead of doing them on the plane on the way to the PC meeting. They are more likely to do a careful job for that reason, and because the authors can correct them.

-- excerpted (with permission) from Notes on Chairing Program Committees by Kathryn S McKinley

I fould rebuttals helpful. They serve as a hard pre-PC-meeting deadline for both external reviewers and PC members. They make authors feel better. They ocasionally make a difference in the PC's decision. I recommend keeping them short (e.g., 200 words) to reduce both author and PC burden.

-- excerpted (with permission) from Some Advice for Program Committee Chairs Based on my ISCA 2005 Experience by Mark D. Hill