Author Response Instructions
CAIS 2026 Author Response Period
During the author response period, you have the opportunity to respond to reviewer feedback on your CAIS 2026 submission. Responses are optional but encouraged, especially if reviews contain factual errors or raise questions you can address.
Suggested Response Structure
The most effective author responses tend to follow a three-part structure:
- Overview — general response to salient points across all reviews
- Planned Changes — concrete revisions you would make if accepted
- Detailed Per-Reviewer Responses — point-by-point responses to each reviewer
Sections 1 and 2 should fit within the 1,000-word soft limit. Section 3 lives beyond it (hidden by default, expandable by reviewers). You are welcome to use this format, though it is not required.
1. Overview
A general discussion responding to the salient points raised by reviewers across all reviews. Lead with the most important issue. If you believe all reviews are accurate and fair, you can say so here and keep it short.
2. Planned Changes
Concrete revisions you would make if accepted. This helps the PC evaluate whether concerns are addressable. If you believe no changes are needed, say that.
3. Detailed Per-Reviewer Responses
Point-by-point responses to each reviewer's specific questions and comments, organized with clear headers per reviewer.
Per-Reviewer Response Detail
Structure the per-reviewer section with clear headers:
[..]
Specific questions/comments: Review #B
[..]
Specific questions/comments: Review #C
[..]
It is not necessary or productive to respond to every point in each review. Focus on the comments that you believe are most likely to affect the outcome:
- Factual errors in reviews. Point to specific sections of your submission that address the concern.
- Direct questions asked by reviewers. Answer them.
- Misunderstandings about your approach or evaluation. Clarify concisely.
This section lives beyond the 1,000-word soft limit and is hidden from reviewers by default. Reviewers who want the point-by-point detail can expand it.
Double-Blind Reminder
Practical Tips
Be concise
Reviewers and ACs are reading responses for many papers. A focused, well-organized response is more effective than a lengthy one.
Prioritize
You do not need to address every minor comment. Focus on the issues most likely to affect the outcome.
Be respectful
Even if you disagree with a reviewer, engage constructively with their perspective.
Silence is fine
If you have nothing to add, it is fine to not submit a response. Silence will not be held against you.
What Happens Next
After the response period closes, reviewers will read your response and add post-response comments to their reviews acknowledging your points. The program committee will then discuss your paper, taking both the original reviews and your response into account, before making a final decision.
To be clear: there is no further exchange between authors and reviewers after you submit your response. Reviewers will not ask follow-up questions, and you will not have a chance to reply again. This is by design. We want the response to be a focused, complete document rather than an extended negotiation. Write accordingly.
Questions? Contact the program chairs at program-chairs@caisconf.org.
