Last year, I submitted a paper to the conference XX'22 in January. We made an Arxiv preprint. And the paper got rejected. We got very good reviews, except there were some imprecisions that we needed to improve.
Some months later we submit to YY'23 and the paper got accepted in November 2022. We wrote blogs about the paper, tutorials, we released software...
A few weeks ago, we presented the paper in the YY'23 conference.
Now I am a reviewer of XX'23. And I have to review a paper whose main claim is the same that we made in our submission in XX'22. It has been on Arxiv since then and has now been published.
The keywords are the same. The paper title has the exact same bigram. Their method is different, but with the same theoretical principles.
One of the experiments has the same evaluation methodology as ours.
And, obviously, there is no citation. The main contribution of this paper is being novel about this technique that is very simple.
As a reviewer, what should I do?
Paper submission XX'22: Jan 2022
Paper notification XX'22: May 2022
Conference XX'22: July 2022
Preprint in arxiv: Jan 2022
Paper submission YY'22: Aug 2022
Paper notification YY'22: Nov 2022
Conference YY'23: Feb 2023
Paper submission XX'23: Jan 2023
Note that the XX'23 submission is before the YY'23 presentation