Reviews
Track reviewer progress, read aggregated review reports, and view AI analysis for every paper from the Reviews tab of the Program Chair Console.
Purpose
The Reviews tab is where you monitor how peer review is going for your program. It gives you two views: a progress view that shows how many reviews each paper has collected, and a reports view that lets you read the assembled reviews — scores, written comments, confidential notes, and AI analysis — for any paper. You use it to spot papers that are stalled, see emerging accept/reject signals, and read what reviewers actually wrote before you move to the Decisions tab.
This tab is part of the Full-tier peer-review workflow (DIRECT review mode). It is read-and-monitor: you record the actual outcomes in the Decisions tab.
When you use it
- During the review phase, to check completion: how many of the expected reviews are in for each paper, and which papers are still pending.
- To read a paper's full review report — each reviewer's recommendation, confidence, and section-by-section comments — in one place.
- To read the confidential comments reviewers left for the chairs and area chairs.
- To check the AI analysis generated for a paper alongside the human reviews.
- To see early accept/reject leanings (average score and a suggested decision) before you commit anything.
Walkthrough
Track reviewer progress
- 1
Open the Program Chair Console, select your program, and open the Reviews tab. The progress view loads first.
- 2
Read the summary cards across the top: Papers (total), Completed, Pending, and Overall Completion (percent).
- 3
Find a paper with the search box (Search by paper ID or title...) or narrow the list with the status dropdown: All Status, Pending, In Progress, or Complete.
- 4
Read each row: the Progress column shows reviews collected against the number expected, with a colored bar; AI Score and Avg Score show the AI's score and the average of the reviewers' recommendations; the Status badge reads Complete, In Progress, or Pending.
- 5
Sort by clicking a column header (Paper ID, Paper Title, Progress, AI Score, Avg Score, or Status); click again to flip the direction.
- 6
On any row, use the action icons: the eye icon opens the paper, the robot icon opens its AI review, and the list icon opens the review report (or a "pending review" notice if no reviews are in yet).
Read the review reports
- 1
Switch to the reports view within the Reviews tab to see the Paper Review Status table, one row per paper with its reviewers listed.
- 2
Click a reviewer name in a paper's row to open that reviewer's detailed review. Names are clickable only once that reviewer has submitted (or revised) their review.
- 3
Read the report modal: the scores table shows each reviewer's Overall Recommendation and Confidence plus the averages, followed by the detailed comments for authors (summary, strengths, weaknesses, questions, limitations) and any Confidential Comments (AC/PC Only).
- 4
Use the View Report button on a row to open the same combined report, or AI Report to open the AI analysis (overall assessment, strengths, weaknesses, questions, and detailed scores).
- 5
Check the Decision column for the early leaning — Accept, Reject, or Pending — derived from the average score once review is complete. This is a guide only; you make the real call in the Decisions tab.
Tips
The AI analysis is generated automatically when a paper is submitted while AI review enhancement is enabled for the program. Treat the AI score and the suggested Decision as signals to weigh alongside the human reviews — the accept/reject label here is just the average score crossing a threshold, not a recorded decision.
The Confidential Comments (AC/PC Only) section in a report is meant for chairs and area chairs. It is not part of what authors see, so it is the place to read reviewers' candid notes before deciding.
A few details could not be confirmed from the code and should be verified in the running app: the exact labels of the two views (progress vs. reports) as shown in the sub-tab navigation; whether the Send Reminders button is wired to actually email reviewers (no handler is present in the code); and whether the number of reviews expected per paper is fixed at three or varies by program.