ConfTrack Editor Guide
ConfTrack User Guide
Editor Guide
Assign reviewers, manage the review cycle, and make editorial decisions — guiding each paper from submission to final outcome.
✏️
Section 01
Your Role as an Editor

Editors are the coordinators of the peer-review process. You are responsible for a defined set of papers (usually within a track or a topic domain), from initial screening through to the final accept/reject decision. You do not typically read papers in depth yourself — you direct reviewers and synthesise their assessments into a decision.

The editorial workflow has three main phases:

1
AssignSelect appropriate reviewers for each paper and send them invitations with a deadline.
2
MonitorTrack review progress, send reminders to overdue reviewers, and handle substitutions if a reviewer declines.
3
DecideOnce reviews are in, make the editorial decision and communicate it to the authors.
ℹ️
Track access: Your editor account is limited to the track(s) assigned to you by the conference admin. Papers outside your track are not visible to you.
Section 02
Dashboard Overview

When you log in, the Dashboard shows summary counts of papers in your assigned track(s):

PanelWhat it shows
New SubmissionsPapers recently submitted that have not yet been assigned to any editor. (Admin-assigned papers may already appear here.)
Under ReviewPapers that have been assigned reviewers and are awaiting review completion.
Review CompletePapers where all assigned reviewers have submitted reviews — awaiting your decision.
With AuthorPapers where you issued a revision decision and are awaiting the author's revised version.
Decisions MadeAccepted, Rejected, or Withdrawn papers.

Click any panel to jump to a filtered list of those papers. The number in red or amber indicates papers that need attention (overdue reviews, stalled decisions).

Section 03
Assigned Papers

Navigate to Assigned Papers in the sidebar to see all papers in your track. The list shows paper ID, title, submission type, current status, reviewer count, and days since submission.

Opening the Paper Workspace

Click a paper's title to open the Paper Workspace — the central page for managing that paper. From here you can:

  • Read the abstract and download the manuscript
  • View co-authors and submission metadata
  • Assign and manage reviewers
  • View submitted reviews
  • Issue editorial decisions
  • Request camera-ready documents
  • View the paper's full history and audit trail
Initial screening: When a paper is first assigned to you, quickly check that it has a manuscript uploaded and that it meets the basic formatting requirements before investing in reviewer recruitment.
Section 04
Assigning Reviewers

In the Paper Workspace, find the Reviewers section. Most conferences require 2–3 reviewers per paper. The reviewer pool consists of all registered reviewers in the conference.

1
Search for reviewersType a name, institution, or keyword in the reviewer search box. Reviewer expertise areas (if set) are shown to help you match them to the paper topic.
2
Check workloadThe current assignment count is shown next to each reviewer's name. Aim to distribute reviews evenly across the pool.
3
Add the reviewerClick Assign. The reviewer is added to the paper's reviewer list in "Invited" status. An invitation email is sent automatically with the paper abstract and deadline.
4
Set the review deadlineA default deadline may be configured by the conference admin. You can override it per-paper. A deadline of 2–3 weeks is typical for a full paper review.
5
Confirm acceptanceWait for each reviewer to accept the invitation. If a reviewer declines or does not respond within a few days, assign a substitute.
⚠️
Conflict of interest: Do not assign a reviewer who is a co-author with or close collaborator of the submitting authors. If the paper has a declared conflict, the system may flag it — always check manually as well.

Removing a Reviewer

If a reviewer must be removed after being assigned (e.g., they reported a late conflict), click the trash icon next to their name in the reviewer list. A substitute should be added immediately. The removed reviewer's draft review, if any, is discarded.

Section 05
Monitoring Reviews

The Paper Workspace shows each reviewer's status in real time:

StatusMeaningAction
InvitedInvitation sent, awaiting response.Follow up if no response after 3 days.
AcceptedReviewer accepted the assignment.No action needed; monitor deadline.
DeclinedReviewer declined.Assign a substitute immediately.
Draft SavedReviewer has started but not submitted.Send a reminder if close to deadline.
CompletedReview submitted and locked.Review the submission.
OverdueDeadline passed, review not submitted.Send a reminder; consider a substitute.

Sending Reminders

Click Send Reminder next to an overdue reviewer to send them an automated email. You can customise the message before sending. A reminder log is kept on the paper's history tab.

Reading Submitted Reviews

Once a reviewer submits, their review is immediately visible to you (but not to the authors — authors see reviews only after your decision is issued). The review includes:

  • Recommendation (Accept / Minor / Major / Reject)
  • Comments to authors
  • Confidential comments to editor
  • Criteria scores (if defined)
  • Any attached annotated file
Section 06
Making a Decision

Once you have sufficient reviews, open the Paper Workspace and scroll to the Editorial Decision section. Read all reviews — including the confidential comments — before deciding.

Decision Types

✅ Accept
Paper meets the conference standard without further changes. Authors will be notified and asked to submit camera-ready documents.
🔧 Minor Revision
Small, well-defined changes needed (grammar, clarification, minor data additions). Set a revision deadline. Usually no second review round.
🔄 Major Revision
Significant methodological or structural changes required. A second full review round is typically triggered after the revision is submitted.
✗ Reject
Paper does not meet the standard and cannot be remedied by revision within this conference's timeline.
1
Select the decisionChoose Accept, Minor Revision, Major Revision, or Reject from the dropdown.
2
Write the decision letterCompose a message to the authors summarising the decision and the key reviewer feedback. You may include or summarise individual reviewer comments, but do not expose reviewer identity in double-blind conferences.
3
Set a revision deadline (if applicable)For revision decisions, choose a realistic deadline — typically 2–4 weeks for minor, 4–8 weeks for major revisions.
4
Issue the decisionClick Issue Decision. The authors receive a notification email containing your decision letter and the reviewer comments to authors (not the confidential comments). The paper status updates automatically.
Disagreeing reviewers: When reviewers disagree strongly, you may request an additional review (add a third reviewer) or make a judgment call based on the paper's merit as you understand it. Document your reasoning in the decision letter.

After a Revision is Submitted

When the author uploads a revised manuscript, you will receive a notification. Go to the Paper Workspace and download the revision. For minor revisions, you may decide yourself whether the changes are satisfactory. For major revisions, assign the reviewers for a second round from the same reviewer list.

Section 07
Camera-Ready Request

After issuing an Accept decision, the authors must submit final (camera-ready) documents. This step is opened by you — the authors cannot see the camera-ready upload section until you activate it.

1
Verify acceptanceConfirm the paper is accepted and any minor post-acceptance corrections have been addressed.
2
Request camera-ready documentsIn the Paper Workspace, click Request Camera-Ready Documents. This opens the upload section for the authors and sends them a notification email listing the required documents.
3
Review uploaded filesWhen the author submits camera-ready files, you receive a notification. Download and review the final manuscript to confirm it matches the accepted version with requested changes applied.
4
Mark as completeIf the camera-ready documents are satisfactory, mark the paper complete. The paper status changes to Camera-Ready in the system.
⚠️
Incomplete camera-ready: If the submitted files are missing or do not meet requirements, send the author a message from the paper workspace describing what is needed. Do not mark the paper complete until all required files are received.
Section 08
Communicating with Authors

All communication with authors should go through the platform's messaging system on the paper workspace, not via personal email. This ensures a complete audit trail and keeps all communications visible to the conference admin.

  • Decision letters are sent automatically when you issue a decision — do not email authors separately about the decision.
  • Queries — if you need clarification from the author before making a decision, use the Send Message to Author function in the Paper Workspace.
  • Reminders — if an author has not submitted their revision by the deadline, the system can send an automated reminder. You can also send a custom message.
  • Withdrawal requests — if an author asks to withdraw, confirm with them once, then use the Withdraw action in the Paper Workspace. The paper is immediately removed from the review queue.
Response time: Authors in revision mode are often under time pressure. Aim to confirm receipt of revisions within 48 hours and issue revision decisions within 5–7 working days of receiving all reviewer assessments.