This document tracks the status of major computer science conferences (currently defined as those listed in http://csrankings.org) with respect to how they maintain anonymity during the reviewing process; it is curated by Emery Berger.
For the purposes of this document:
-
Single-blind means that author identities and affiliations are visible to reviewers at all points during the reviewing process.
-
At least partially double-blind means that author identities and affiliations are not revealed for papers prior to the submission of initial paper reviews.
-
Fully double-blind means that "double-blind to accept" is employed. That is, author identities and affiliations are not revealed until the conclusion of the PC meeting, and only for accepted papers (including conditionally-accepted papers, pending modifications due to shepherding). In cases where the CFP does not explicitly state the use of full double-blind reviewing, this status has been verified directly with the program chair(s).
-
Effectiveness of Anonymization in Double-Blind Reviewing, Le Goues, Brun, Appel, Berger, Khurshid, Smaragdakis; Communications of the ACM, May 2018. ArXiv link
-
Improving Publication Quality by Reducing Bias with Double-Blind Reviewing and Author Response; ACM SIGPLAN Notices, 43(8):5--9, McKinley, 2008.
-
More on Improving Reviewing Quality with Double-Blind Reviewing, External Review Committees, Author Response, and in Person Program Committee Meetings, McKinley, 2015.