{"id":787,"date":"2021-12-05T17:06:19","date_gmt":"2021-12-05T17:06:19","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/tv1.2fc.mywebsitetransfer.com\/?page_id=787"},"modified":"2023-05-06T00:19:36","modified_gmt":"2023-05-06T00:19:36","slug":"journal-reviewing-guidelines","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/ismar23.org\/journal-reviewing-guidelines\/","title":{"rendered":"Journal \u2013 Reviewing Guidelines"},"content":{"rendered":"\t\t<div data-elementor-type=\"wp-page\" data-elementor-id=\"787\" class=\"elementor elementor-787\">\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<section class=\"elementor-section elementor-top-section elementor-element elementor-element-ececc36 elementor-section-boxed elementor-section-height-default elementor-section-height-default\" data-id=\"ececc36\" data-element_type=\"section\">\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"elementor-container elementor-column-gap-default\">\n\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"elementor-column elementor-col-100 elementor-top-column elementor-element elementor-element-c274992\" data-id=\"c274992\" data-element_type=\"column\">\n\t\t\t<div class=\"elementor-widget-wrap elementor-element-populated\">\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"elementor-element elementor-element-857f555 elementor-widget elementor-widget-text-editor\" data-id=\"857f555\" data-element_type=\"widget\" data-widget_type=\"text-editor.default\">\n\t\t\t\t<div class=\"elementor-widget-container\">\n\t\t\t<style>\/*! elementor - v3.10.2 - 29-01-2023 *\/\n.elementor-widget-text-editor.elementor-drop-cap-view-stacked .elementor-drop-cap{background-color:#818a91;color:#fff}.elementor-widget-text-editor.elementor-drop-cap-view-framed .elementor-drop-cap{color:#818a91;border:3px solid;background-color:transparent}.elementor-widget-text-editor:not(.elementor-drop-cap-view-default) .elementor-drop-cap{margin-top:8px}.elementor-widget-text-editor:not(.elementor-drop-cap-view-default) .elementor-drop-cap-letter{width:1em;height:1em}.elementor-widget-text-editor .elementor-drop-cap{float:left;text-align:center;line-height:1;font-size:50px}.elementor-widget-text-editor .elementor-drop-cap-letter{display:inline-block}<\/style>\t\t\t\t<h1 style=\"text-align: center;\"><strong><span style=\"color: #800000;\">REVIEWING GUIDELINES<\/span><\/strong><\/h1>\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t<\/section>\n\t\t\t\t<section class=\"elementor-section elementor-top-section elementor-element elementor-element-118ed56 elementor-section-boxed elementor-section-height-default elementor-section-height-default\" data-id=\"118ed56\" data-element_type=\"section\">\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"elementor-container elementor-column-gap-default\">\n\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"elementor-column elementor-col-100 elementor-top-column elementor-element elementor-element-b5fbbcf\" data-id=\"b5fbbcf\" data-element_type=\"column\">\n\t\t\t<div class=\"elementor-widget-wrap elementor-element-populated\">\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"elementor-element elementor-element-5fa72ff elementor-widget elementor-widget-text-editor\" data-id=\"5fa72ff\" data-element_type=\"widget\" data-widget_type=\"text-editor.default\">\n\t\t\t\t<div class=\"elementor-widget-container\">\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\">This document is to provide guidance for ISMAR 2023 reviewing, and is specifically directed towards those that are performing FULL REVIEWS of papers (e.g., secondary 2AC \/ committee member and external reviewers).<\/span><\/p><p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\">Like previous years, our review process will include a phase whereby the primary (1AC) reviewer \/ coordinator will examine all full reviews for quality. If the primary deems that a review is insufficient in detail or quality, then reviewers will be asked to revisit their review and improve its quality. In extreme cases, reviewers may be removed from the process, and other reviewers will be sought to replace the inadequate reviews.<\/span><\/p><p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\">So as is likely clear by now, we are very serious in ensuring the highest possible reviewing standards for ISMAR 2023. As such, we ask that you carefully review these guidelines, and if needed, seek additional resources to ensure you understand the level of reviewing quality we are committed to.<\/span><\/p><p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\">Before getting into the details of a quality review, we want to let you know that ISMAR 2023 reviewing forms require that you provide a single score judging the quality of the paper; assessing the submission\u2019s quality with respect to a paper presented at ISMAR in general.<\/span><\/p><p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\">For guidance, we consider a paper of\u00a0<b><i>sufficient journal quality<\/i><\/b>\u00a0if it provides obvious and strong contributions to the field, either in theory, methods, engineering, design and\/or evaluation approaches. Journal papers should reflect an in-depth overview of related work (as compared to conference paper), and, in turn, the resulting paper is comprehensive and self-contained.<\/span><\/p><p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\">Therefore, as you perform your reviews, we ask that you reflect on the overall contribution of the paper and how the contributions position the submission to be accepted into the ISMAR journal track.<\/span><\/p><p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\">In terms of the actual review, we\u00a0<b><i>strongly recommend<\/i><\/b>\u00a0that you read the entire (short) article by Ken Hinckley, which we found to give a lot of constructive advice:<\/span><\/p><blockquote><p><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\">Hinckley, K. (2016). So You\u2019re a Program Committee Member Now: On Excellence in Reviews and Meta-Reviews and Championing Submitted Work That Has Merit. <a href=\"https:\/\/www.microsoft.com\/en-us\/research\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/10\/Excellence-in-Reviews-MobileHCI-2015-Web-Site.pdf\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">https:\/\/www.microsoft.com\/en-us\/research\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/10\/Excellence-in-Reviews-MobileHCI-2015-Web-Site.pdf<\/a><\/span><\/p><\/blockquote><p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\">We\u2019ve pulled some of the major elements from Hinckley\u2019s paper, in some cases modified the text, added insights from further advice by Steve Mann and Mark Bernstein, and placed them in bullet form below:<\/span><\/p><ul style=\"text-align: justify;\"><li style=\"list-style-type: none; margin-top: -20px; margin-bottom: -10px;\"><ul><li aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\">A high quality review should have a number of paragraphs (or even several pages of well-considered commentary if warranted).<\/span><\/li><li aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\">Short and\/or content-free reviews are insufficient and will be caught by our reviewer\u2019s review process.<\/span><\/li><li aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\">Read papers with care and sympathy. Many hours of work \u2014 in some cases, years of work \u2014 have gone into research and writing this paper. Try to avoid last-minute reviews.<\/span><\/li><li aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\">State specifically why the paper is \u201cgreat\u201d, \u201cmediocre\u201d or \u201cbad\u201d.<\/span><\/li><li aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\">Clearly describe on what grounds the paper should be accepted (or rejected).<\/span><\/li><li aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\">Describe the contributions in the paper and why they are noteworthy, or important.<\/span><\/li><li aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\">Reflect on the contributions or possible contributions of the work.<\/span><\/li><li aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\">Explicitly and clearly discuss the weaknesses and limitations in a positive and\u00a0<b>constructive<\/b>\u00a0manner. Specifically, don\u2019t be insulting \u2013 be positive.<\/span><\/li><li aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\">Clearly and explicitly call out the strengths and utility of the work.<\/span><\/li><li aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\">Your review should\u00a0<b>not be about what should have been done<\/b>; rather it should be a critique of what the authors actually did.<\/span><\/li><li aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\">Consider how the author\u2019s arguments, results, and demonstrations fit into closely related work as well as the field as a whole.<\/span><\/li><li aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\">Do not reject a paper because of a few missed citations.<\/span><\/li><li aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\">In fact, do not reject a paper because of anything that can be easily fixed\/addressed, clearly state the requirements, all conditionally accepted papers will be shepherded towards an improved version that fulfill those requirements.<\/span><\/li><li aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\">A paper\u2019s failure to justify or fully motivate certain decisions likely represent a correctable oversight, not an unequivocal sign of poorly conceived research.<\/span><\/li><li aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\">Avoid the fallacy of novelty. Specifically, do not simply reject papers because they replicated experiments.<\/span><\/li><li aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\">Reviewing scores: Around 2\/3 of your rankings should be 1 or 6, around 1\/3 should be 2 or 5, and you should rarely, rarely, rarely give a rating of 3 or 4.<\/span><\/li><\/ul><\/li><\/ul><p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\">From ISMAR\u2019s perspective, we would like to add that in your role as gatekeepers of high-quality papers, we ask that you not categorically find hidden flaws and assassinate papers wherever possible but instead accept papers for their merits.<\/span><\/p><p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\">When reviewing, keep in mind that almost every paper we review \u201ccould have done x, or y, or z\u201d. Don\u2019t fall into this trap! We cannot reject papers because authors did not perform their research the way we would have done it, or even how it is typically done. Instead, we must judge each paper on its own merit, and whether or not the body of work presented can stand on its own, as presented. Sure, every paper \u201ccould have done more\u201d, but <b><i>is the work that has been done of sufficient quality and impact<\/i><\/b>?<\/span><\/p><p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\">Furthermore, we should not reject papers because \u201cthis experiment has been done before\u201d.\u00a0 This fallacy of novelty, ignores the long standing tradition in science of\u00a0<i>replication<\/i>.\u00a0 New work that performs similar research and finds consistent (or even conflicting) results\u00a0<b><i>are of value<\/i><\/b>\u00a0to the community and to science in general, and should be considered on their own merits.<\/span><\/p><p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\">When evaluating papers that run human-subjects studies it is important that the participant sample population be representative of the population for which the technology is being designed. For example, if the technology is being designed for a general population then the participant population should include equal gender representation and a wide range of ages. All papers with human-subject studies must report at a minimum demographic information including age, gender, and every possible hint of social and diversity representation. <strong><em>If this is not the case, reviewers should not automatically reject the paper but instead provide appropriate constructive critique and advice regarding general claims that do not use representative sample populations.<\/em><\/strong><\/span><\/p><p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\">In addition, we want to encourage you to make use of conditionally accepting papers. In contrast to previous years, we would like to encourage the conditional acceptance of more papers and give authors the chance to polish their work in the revision cycle. If these conditions are not fulfilled, then the paper can (and should) be rejected at the end.<\/span><\/p><p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\">And finally, to quote Ken Hinckley: &#8220;When in doubt, trust the literature to sort it out.&#8221;<\/span><\/p><h3 style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"color: #800000; font-size: 18pt;\"><b>COVID-19 Situation<\/b><\/span><\/h3><p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\">We are aware that a lot of researchers are still facing challenges due to COVID-19 with regards to conducting research. In particular, in-person user evaluation currently remains impossible for most researchers. However, it is important to highlight that ISMAR is not lowering the publication standard. We encourage authors to consider alternative ways for validating their results and would like to ask the reviewers to do the same. For many works there are suitable alternative ways to demonstrate validity.<\/span><\/p><p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\">These guidelines are based on the work of the ISMAR 2019, 2020,2021 and 2022 PC Chairs (Shimin Hu, Joseph L. Gabbard, Jens Grubert, Stefanie Zollmann, Denis Kalkofen, Jonathan Ventura, Daisuke Iwai, Guillaume Moreau, Tabitha Peck, Lili Wang) and updated for the ISMAR 2023 review process.<\/span><\/p><p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\">Thank you for work to ensure the highest quality ISMAR reviews,<\/span><\/p><p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\"><strong>ISMAR 2023 Journal Papers Chairs,<\/strong><\/span><\/p><p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\">Michele Fiorentino, Joseph L. Gabbard, Gun Lee, Guillaume Moreau, Maud Marchal<\/span><\/p>\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t<\/section>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>REVIEWING GUIDELINES This document is to provide guidance for ISMAR 2023 reviewing, and is specifically directed towards those that are performing FULL REVIEWS of papers (e.g., secondary 2AC \/ committee member and external reviewers). Like previous years, our review process will include a phase whereby the primary (1AC) reviewer \/ coordinator will examine all full<\/p>\n<p class=\"more-link\"><a href=\"https:\/\/ismar23.org\/journal-reviewing-guidelines\/\" class=\"themebutton\">Read More<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"parent":0,"menu_order":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","template":"","meta":{"_coblocks_attr":"","_coblocks_dimensions":"","_coblocks_responsive_height":"","_coblocks_accordion_ie_support":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[16],"tags":[],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v20.0 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/wordpress\/plugins\/seo\/ -->\n<title>Journal \u2013 Reviewing Guidelines - ISMAR 2023<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/ismar23.org\/journal-reviewing-guidelines\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Journal \u2013 Reviewing Guidelines - ISMAR 2023\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"REVIEWING GUIDELINES This document is to provide guidance for ISMAR 2023 reviewing, and is specifically directed towards those that are performing FULL REVIEWS of papers (e.g., secondary 2AC \/ committee member and external reviewers). Like previous years, our review process will include a phase whereby the primary (1AC) reviewer \/ coordinator will examine all fullRead More\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/ismar23.org\/journal-reviewing-guidelines\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"ISMAR 2023\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/ismarconf\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2023-05-06T00:19:36+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/ismar23.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/02\/logo_ismar.png\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"477\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"176\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/png\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@ismarconf\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"6 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/ismar23.org\/journal-reviewing-guidelines\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/ismar23.org\/journal-reviewing-guidelines\/\",\"name\":\"Journal \u2013 Reviewing Guidelines - ISMAR 2023\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/ismar23.org\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2021-12-05T17:06:19+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2023-05-06T00:19:36+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/ismar23.org\/journal-reviewing-guidelines\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-AU\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/ismar23.org\/journal-reviewing-guidelines\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/ismar23.org\/journal-reviewing-guidelines\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/ismar23.org\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Journal \u2013 Reviewing Guidelines\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/ismar23.org\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/ismar23.org\/\",\"name\":\"ISMAR2023\",\"description\":\"ISMAR 2023\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/ismar23.org\/#organization\"},\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/ismar23.org\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":\"required name=search_term_string\"}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-AU\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/ismar23.org\/#organization\",\"name\":\"ISMAR2023\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/ismar23.org\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-AU\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/ismar23.org\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/ismar23.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/02\/logo_ismar.png\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/ismar23.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/02\/logo_ismar.png\",\"width\":477,\"height\":176,\"caption\":\"ISMAR2023\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/ismar23.org\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/ismarconf\/\",\"https:\/\/twitter.com\/ismarconf\"]}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Journal \u2013 Reviewing Guidelines - ISMAR 2023","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/ismar23.org\/journal-reviewing-guidelines\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Journal \u2013 Reviewing Guidelines - ISMAR 2023","og_description":"REVIEWING GUIDELINES This document is to provide guidance for ISMAR 2023 reviewing, and is specifically directed towards those that are performing FULL REVIEWS of papers (e.g., secondary 2AC \/ committee member and external reviewers). Like previous years, our review process will include a phase whereby the primary (1AC) reviewer \/ coordinator will examine all fullRead More","og_url":"https:\/\/ismar23.org\/journal-reviewing-guidelines\/","og_site_name":"ISMAR 2023","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/ismarconf\/","article_modified_time":"2023-05-06T00:19:36+00:00","og_image":[{"width":477,"height":176,"url":"https:\/\/ismar23.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/02\/logo_ismar.png","type":"image\/png"}],"twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_site":"@ismarconf","twitter_misc":{"Est. reading time":"6 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/ismar23.org\/journal-reviewing-guidelines\/","url":"https:\/\/ismar23.org\/journal-reviewing-guidelines\/","name":"Journal \u2013 Reviewing Guidelines - ISMAR 2023","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/ismar23.org\/#website"},"datePublished":"2021-12-05T17:06:19+00:00","dateModified":"2023-05-06T00:19:36+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/ismar23.org\/journal-reviewing-guidelines\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-AU","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/ismar23.org\/journal-reviewing-guidelines\/"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/ismar23.org\/journal-reviewing-guidelines\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/ismar23.org\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Journal \u2013 Reviewing Guidelines"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/ismar23.org\/#website","url":"https:\/\/ismar23.org\/","name":"ISMAR2023","description":"ISMAR 2023","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/ismar23.org\/#organization"},"potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/ismar23.org\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":"required name=search_term_string"}],"inLanguage":"en-AU"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/ismar23.org\/#organization","name":"ISMAR2023","url":"https:\/\/ismar23.org\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-AU","@id":"https:\/\/ismar23.org\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/ismar23.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/02\/logo_ismar.png","contentUrl":"https:\/\/ismar23.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/02\/logo_ismar.png","width":477,"height":176,"caption":"ISMAR2023"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/ismar23.org\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/ismarconf\/","https:\/\/twitter.com\/ismarconf"]}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/ismar23.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/787"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/ismar23.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/ismar23.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/page"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ismar23.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ismar23.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=787"}],"version-history":[{"count":31,"href":"https:\/\/ismar23.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/787\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":6392,"href":"https:\/\/ismar23.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/787\/revisions\/6392"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/ismar23.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=787"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ismar23.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=787"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ismar23.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=787"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}