Reviewer Assignment
Upload a spreadsheet of papers and a spreadsheet of accepted reviewers. The tool assigns each paper a configurable number of conflict-free reviewers, ranked by tag overlap, and exports an Excel workbook with per-assignment justifications. For reviewers that resolve to a faculty in this directory, conflicts (shared institution, co-authorship, shared PhD program) are detected automatically. If you supply emails, shared-institution conflicts are also caught by email domain (works for external people too), and co-authorship on another paper in this same batch is flagged even though it isn’t published yet.
Publication data pulled: 2026-06-24
Download full faculty directory (Excel) ↓ All faculty in the database with their school, topical tags, and methodological tags.
1. Papers
Title, Authors (semicolon-separated),
Topical Tags, Methodological Tags (both semicolon-separated).
Optional: Author Emails (semicolon-separated, same order as authors)
— enables shared-institution conflict detection by email domain.
Download template ↓
2. Reviewers
Name. Optional: Affiliation, Email,
Topical Tags, Methodological Tags (semicolon-separated;
tags are used as fallback when the name doesn’t resolve to a directory
faculty). Email enables shared-institution conflict detection by
domain, including for external reviewers.
Download template ↓
3. Suggested reviewers (optional)
Title (matched to the papers
above) and Suggested Reviewers (semicolon-separated names).
Suggested reviewers are assigned first unless they have a conflict of interest;
the per-reviewer cap is still respected. A suggested name not in the reviewers
file above is added as an external reviewer.
Download template ↓