Resource Optimization for Program Committee Members: A Subreview Article

Authors Michael A. Bender, Samuel McCauley, Bertrand Simon, Shikha Singh, Frédéric Vivien

Thumbnail PDF


  • Filesize: 0.55 MB
  • 20 pages

Document Identifiers

Author Details

Michael A. Bender
Samuel McCauley
Bertrand Simon
Shikha Singh
Frédéric Vivien

Cite AsGet BibTex

Michael A. Bender, Samuel McCauley, Bertrand Simon, Shikha Singh, and Frédéric Vivien. Resource Optimization for Program Committee Members: A Subreview Article. In 8th International Conference on Fun with Algorithms (FUN 2016). Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), Volume 49, pp. 7:1-7:20, Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik (2016)


This paper formalizes a resource-allocation problem that is all too familiar to the seasoned program-committee member. For each submission j that the PC member has the honor of reviewing, there is a choice. The PC member can spend the time to review submission j in detail on his/her own at a cost of C_i. Alternatively, the PC member can spend the time to identify and contact peers, hoping to recruit them as subreviewers, at a cost of 1 per subreviewer. These potential subreviewers have a certain probability of rejecting each review request, and this probability increases as time goes on. Once the PC member runs out of time or unasked experts, he/she is forced to review the paper without outside assistance. This paper gives optimal solutions to several variations of the scheduling-reviewers problem. Most of the solutions from this paper are based on an iterated log function of C_i. In particular, with k rounds, the optimal solution sends the k-iterated log of C_i requests in the first round, the (k-1)-iterated log in the second round, and so forth. One of the contributions of this paper is solving this problem exactly, even when rejection probabilities may increase. Naturally, PC members must make an integral number of subreview requests. This paper gives, as an intermediate result, a linear-time algorithm to transform the artificial problem in which one can send fractional requests into the less-artificial problem in which one sends an integral number of requests. Finally, this paper considers the case where the PC member knows nothing about the probability that a potential subreviewer agrees to review the paper. This paper gives an approximation algorithm for this case, whose bounds improve as the number of rounds increases.
  • Scheduling
  • Delegation
  • Subreviews


  • Access Statistics
  • Total Accesses (updated on a weekly basis)
    PDF Downloads


  1. Dan Alistarh, Michael A. Bender, Seth Gilbert, and Rachi Guerraoui. How to allocate tasks asynchronously. In Proc. of the 53nd Annual IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (FOCS), pages 331-340, 2012. Google Scholar
  2. Chumki Basu, Haym Hirsh, William W. Cohen, and Craig Nevill-Manning. Recommending papers by mining the web. In Proc. of the IJCAI Workshop on Learning about Users, 1999. Google Scholar
  3. Michael A. Bender and Cynthia A. Phillips. Scheduling DAGs on asynchronous processors. In Proc. of the 19th Annual ACM Symposium on Parallelism in Algorithms and Architectures (SPAA), pages 35-45, 2007. Google Scholar
  4. Salem Benferhat and Jérôme Lang. Conference paper assignment. International Journal of Intelligent Systems, 16(10):1183-1192, 2001. Google Scholar
  5. George Bosilca, Aurélien Bouteiller, Élisabeth Brunet, Franck Cappello, Jack Dongarra, Amina Guermouche, Thomas Hérault, Yves Robert, Frédéric Vivien, and Dounia Zaidouni. Unified Model for Assessing Checkpointing Protocols at Extreme-Scale. Concurrency and Computation: Practice and Experience, 26(17):2727-2810, 2013. Google Scholar
  6. Henri Casanova, Fanny Dufossé, Yves Robert, and Frédéric Vivien. Mapping applications on volatile resources. International Journal of High Performance Computing Applications, 29(1):19, 2015. URL:
  7. Henri Casanova, Dounia Zaidouni, and Frédéric Vivien. Using replication for resilience on exascale systems. In Thomas Hérault and Yves Robert, editors, Fault-Tolerance Techniques for High-Performance Computing, page 50. Springer, 2015. Google Scholar
  8. Bogdan S. Chlebus and Dariusz R. Kowalski. Cooperative asynchronous update of shared memory. In Proc. of the 37th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing (STOC), pages 733-739, 2005. Google Scholar
  9. Graham Cormode. How not to review a paper: The tools and techniques of the adversarial reviewer. ACM SIGMOD Record, 37(4):100-104, 2009. Google Scholar
  10. John T. Daly. A higher order estimate of the optimum checkpoint interval for restart dumps. Future Generation Computer Systems, 22(3):303-312, 2004. Google Scholar
  11. Susan T. Dumais and Jakob Nielsen. Automating the assignment of submitted manuscripts to reviewers. In Proc. of the 15th Annual International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval, pages 233-244, 1992. Google Scholar
  12. Hiroshi Fujiwara and Kazuo Iwama. Average-case competitive analyses for ski-rental problems. Algorithmica, 42(1):95-107, 2005. Google Scholar
  13. Judy Goldsmith and Robert H. Sloan. The AI conference paper assignment problem. In Proc. of the AAAI Workshop on Preference Handling for Artificial Intelligence, Vancouver, pages 53-57, 2007. Google Scholar
  14. David Hartvigsen, Jerry C. Wei, and Richard Czuchlewski. The conference paper-reviewer assignment problem. Decision Sciences, 30(3):865-876, 1999. Google Scholar
  15. Thomas Hérault and Yves Robert. Fault-Tolerance Techniques for High-Performance Computing. Springer, 2015. URL:
  16. Seth Hettich and Michael J. Pazzani. Mining for proposal reviewers: lessons learned at the national science foundation. In Proc. of the 12th Annual ACM International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining (KDD), pages 862-871, 2006. Google Scholar
  17. Z. M. Kedem, K. V. Palem, M. O. Rabin, and A. Raghunathan. Efficient program transformation for resilient parallel computation via randomization. In Proc. of the 24th Annual ACM Symposium on the Theory of Computing (STOC), pages 306-317, 1992. Google Scholar
  18. Zvi M. Kedem, Krishna V. Palem, and Paul G. Spirakis. Efficient robust parallel computations. In Proc. of the 22rd Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing (STOC), pages 138-148, 1990. Google Scholar
  19. Dariusz R. Kowalski and Alexander A. Shvartsman. Writing-all deterministically and optimally using a nontrivial number of asynchronous processors. ACM Transactions on Algorithms, 4:33:1-33:22, 2008. Google Scholar
  20. Julien Lesca and Patrice Perny. LP solvable models for multiagent fair allocation problems. In Proc. of the 19th European Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pages 393-398. IOS Press, 2010. Google Scholar
  21. Xinlian Li and Toyohide Watanabe. Automatic paper-to-reviewer assignment, based on the matching degree of the reviewers. Procedia Computer Science, 22:633-642, 2013. Google Scholar
  22. Charles Martel and Ramesh Subramonian. On the complexity of certified write-all algorithms. Journal of Algorithms, 16:361-387, 1994. Google Scholar
  23. Juan Julián Merelo-Guervós and Pedro Castillo-Valdivieso. Conference paper assignment using a combined greedy/evolutionary algorithm. In Parallel Problem Solving from Nature-PPSN VIII, pages 602-611, 2004. Google Scholar
  24. David Mimno and Andrew McCallum. Expertise modeling for matching papers with reviewers. In Proc. of the 13th Annual ACM International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining (KDD), pages 500-509, 2007. Google Scholar
  25. Jaroslaw Protasiewicz. A support system for selection of reviewers. In IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man and Cybernetics (SMC), pages 3062-3065, 2014. Google Scholar
  26. Fan Wang, Ben Chen, and Zhaowei Miao. A survey on reviewer assignment problem. In New frontiers in applied artificial intelligence, pages 718-727. Springer, 2008. Google Scholar
  27. Fan Wang, Ning Shi, and Ben Chen. A comprehensive survey of the reviewer assignment problem. International Journal of Information Technology &Decision Making, 9(04):645-668, 2010. Google Scholar
  28. David Yarowsky and Radu Florian. Taking the load off the conference chairs: towards a digital paper-routing assistant. In Proc. of the Joint SIGDAT Conference on Empirical Methods in NLP and Very-Large Corpora, 1999. Google Scholar
Questions / Remarks / Feedback

Feedback for Dagstuhl Publishing

Thanks for your feedback!

Feedback submitted

Could not send message

Please try again later or send an E-mail