% revision history
%
% 20110517 CC: initial version, with input from Hilarie, Jean-Jacques and Serge

\documentclass[11pt]{article}
\usepackage{fancyhdr}
\usepackage{url}
\topmargin=-5mm
\evensidemargin=0cm
\oddsidemargin=0cm
\textwidth=16cm
\textheight=22cm
\addtolength{\headheight}{1.6pt}
\newcommand{\cancel}[1]{}
\newcommand{\mymark}{$^*$}

\newcommand{\lastupdate}{May 2011}

\lhead{\sc IACR Guidelines for Reviewers}
\rhead{\sc \lastupdate}

\title{\bf IACR Guidelines for Reviewers}
\author{\mbox{}}

\date{\lastupdate
 \footnote{The most recent version of this document
    can be obtained from \protect\url{http://www.iacr.org/docs/}.\newline
  Editors of this document: Christian Cachin (2011).}}


\begin{document}

\pagestyle{fancy}
\pagenumbering{arabic}

\maketitle

\noindent Dear Reviewer,
\vspace*{4mm}
\par\noindent
The purpose of this document is to clarify your role as a reviewer for
an IACR publication.  You become a reviewer when you accept the
invitation to review a paper submitted to a scientific publication of
the IACR (such as submitted to a conference or to the Journal of
Cryptology).  Alternatively, you are also a reviewer as a member of a
Program Committee (PC) for an event sponsored by the IACR.

Peer review is essential to the scientific publication process, and
the IACR depends on the altruism and wisdom of volunteer reviewers to
uphold standards and to encourage research.  Your primary
responsibility is to evaluate one or more submission(s) to a
scientific publication with respect to scientific criteria, without
bias for or against the authors or their affiliations.

\paragraph{Confidentiality.}
In your role as a reviewer you must hold the assigned submission(s) in
confidence.  You cannot disclose information about the authors, the
content of submissions, other reviews, or discussions in a PC to
anyone else not in this role.

If you are a member of a PC and use a web-review system, do not
forward your access credentials to a subreviewer. The web-review
system contains very sensitive information. The PC discussions are
confidential within the PC.  In order to obtain independent opinions
about a submission, do not discuss the submission with other reviewers
before writing your review.  This applies when you are reviewer for a
journal as well as when you are a PC member during the initial
individual reviewing phase.

\paragraph{Conflicts of interest.}
% Following text appears also in the Program Chair Guidelines (progchair.tex):
You should not review a submission if you have a \emph{conflict of
  interest} with at least one author of the submission.  The IACR does
not impose a detailed policy on conflicts of interest.  The editor or
Program Chair decides on what constitutes a conflict according to high
standards in terms of scientific integrity~--- at least colleagues
from the same research group, people in a current or very recent
student-advisor relationship, close friends, and family members have a
conflict.

\paragraph{Anonymity.}
In conferences with anonymous submissions, no author names appear on a
submission.  Naturally you may be aware of the authors through other
means; but you should not take any extra action just for discovering
the authors of a submission.

\paragraph{Review content.}
You should judge a submission foremost on its overall quality and
merit as a scientific publication.  You should give a clear
justification for your recommendation.  You should not use rude,
derogatory, or unhelpful language in a review.

The editor, PC member, or Program Chair that assigned the submission
to you should provide further instructions on the format, on
deadlines, and about the criteria for the evaluation in your review.
Once you have agreed to do a review, stick to this and honor your
commitment.

\paragraph{Irregular submissions.}
You should be aware of the IACR policy on irregular submissions.
Irregular submissions typically fall in two categories:
\begin{itemize}
\item \emph{Parallel submissions:} A parallel submission occurs when
  authors submit essentially the same material to one or more other
  publication venues with overlapping reviewing periods.
\item \emph{Plagiarism:} Plagiarism arises when substantial parts of
  existing publications are copied and submitted, virtually unchanged,
  without the addition of new material, and without proper attribution
  of the source, by other ``author(s).''
\end{itemize}
If you believe that you have identified an irregular submission,
contact the editor, PC member, or Program Chair that assigned the
submission to you.  Do not take any action on your own.

\paragraph{Further information.}
The following documents of the IACR give further information on
procedures specific to the IACR:
\begin{itemize}
\item the Rules and Guidelines for Program Chairs;
\item the Policy on Irregular Submissions;
\item the Policy for the Ethics Committee.
\end{itemize}
These are available from \url{http://www.iacr.org/docs/}.

The policies of the ACM regarding publishing and research in computer
science contain more information that mostly applies also to IACR; see
the ACM website under \url{http://www.acm.org/publications/policies/}.


\end{document}

