I have a fairly straightforward approach to reviewing papers: I start by figuring out the main claims the paper makes, and figure out how those claims are proved. From there I start "zooming in to the details". But the primary question is always: does the paper make a claim, and if so, is it proved?

However, some tracks of conferences do not require a full paper. Instead, they require short form papers or extended abstracts describing what the authors will do at the conference. For instance, describing a poster or a demo they will present.

What are some general criteria/strategies for reviewing such papers? How can I come to a well-reasoned decision to reject, if there are no "mortal sins" (like a flawed evaluation) for such papers?

  • 1
    Not an exhaustive list, but the standard questions of novelty, relevance and so on may be a good starting point. But I suppose you are asking for things specific to demo / poster papers.
    – malexmave
    Jul 16, 2016 at 10:52

1 Answer 1


IMO, the following guidelines might help:

  • Extent of novelty
  • Quality of the figures and tables
  • Dedication

Although the third point may seem a little fuzzy, it can be easily observed on sight, especially in the case of poster presentations.

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .