Author : Chanchal Kakad

Companion audit has become the most widely recognized practice for making a decision about papers submitted to a gathering for quite a long time. A critical undertaking engaged with peer audit is to allocate submitted papers to analysts with proper mastery which is alluded to as paper-commentator task. In this paper, we study the paper analyst task issue from both the integrity angle and the decency viewpoint. For the integrity angle, we propose to expand the theme inclusion of the paper-analyst task. This goal is new and the issue dependent on this goal is demonstrated to be NP-hard. To take care of this issue effectively, we plan an estimated calculation which gives a 1/3-guess. For the reasonableness perspective, we play out an itemized investigation on irreconcilable circumstance (COI) types and talk about a few issues identified with utilizing COI, which, we trust, can raise some open dialogs among analysts on the COI study. At last, we directed trials on genuine datasets which confirmed the viability of our calculation and furthermore uncovered some fascinating aftereffects of COI.

Keywords:  Information Retrieval, Journals, Conferences, Reviewer Assignment.