How NOT to review a paper: the tools and techniques of the adversarial reviewer

Authors:
Graham Cormode
Affiliations:
AT&T Labs--Research, Florham Park, NJ
Venue:
ACM SIGMOD Record
Year:
2009

Citing 4
Cited 2

The Task of the Referee

Computer
A guide for new referees in theoretical computer science

Information and Computation
We Are Sorry to Inform You ...

Computer
Thoughts on reviewing

ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review

The ACM SIGCOMM 2009 technical program committee process

ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review
What does an associate editor actually do?

ACM SIGMOD Record

Quantified Score

Hi-index	0.00

Visualization

Abstract

There are several useful guides available for how to review a paper in Computer Science [10, 6, 12, 7, 2]. These are soberly presented, carefully reasoned and sensibly argued. As a result, they are not much fun. So, as a contrast, this note is a checklist of how not to review a paper. It details techniques that are unethical, unfair, or just plain nasty. Since in Computer Science we often present arguments about how an adversary would approach a particular problem, this note describes the adversary's strategy.