RESPONSIBILITIES OF SPIN 2003 PROGRAM COMMITTEE MEMBERS

1. Solicit high-quality technical papers from colleagues, and
distribute paper and electronic conference announcements at your local
site.  Program committee members are encouraged to submit papers;
submissions from PC members will be evaluated according to the same
high standards used to evaluate all other submissions.  The Program
Chairs will not submit papers.  We currently anticipate the deadline
for submission of both abstracts and full papers to be December 6, 2003.

2. Read abstracts of technical papers submitted to the workshop, and
bid on the abstracts, indicating papers you would like to review and
papers on which you have a conflict of interest. Carry out this
bidding process within one week after the submission deadline 
(December 12, 2004).

3. Review the technical papers that are assigned to you by the
reviewing deadline, using a Web-based reviewing system that we will
set up.  The program committee will contain approximately 15 members,
so assuming an upper limit of 50 full paper submissions, you would be
asked to review no more than 10 papers.  The deadline for submitting
reviews to the Web-based reviewing system is January 3, 2004. Note
that you are responsible for being familiar with the papers assigned
to you and represent them at the electronic discussions even if you
delegate reviewing to students or colleagues.

4. Attend the electronic program committee discussions to be held from
January 5 to January 9, 2004 and discuss papers that you have
reviewed. Since committee members are in different time zones, it is
not practical to have all committee members online at the same
time. However, it is important that you respond to discussion on the
papers you have reviewed promptly.

5. Strictly abide by the rules on conflicts of interest. You are
considered to have a conflict of interest on a paper that has an
author or co-author in any of the following categories: 
(1) yourself,
(2) your past and current graduate students, 
(3) your graduate advisors, 
(4) members of your research group within the last 5 years,
(5) a co-author of a paper submitted for publication within the last 5 years,
(6) an employee of your immediate organization (academic department, research
    lab unit, etc.) within the last 5 years, 
(7) someone with whom you have had a significant funding or financial
    relationship within the last 5 years, or 
(8) a member of your family or anyone you consider a close personal friend.  

You will not be allowed to see the reviews of papers on which you have
conflicts, and at the program committee meeting you will not be given 
access to discussion of such papers. The Program Chairs will be able 
to view all reviews for all papers, but they will assign an alternate 
chair for any papers on which they have a conflict; for those papers, 
the alternate chair will select the reviewers and will chair the
discussion at the program committee meeting.