Confessions of a researchaholic

After having a meeting with the patent attorneys, usually you will receive two documents to review – a Word document with texts and a PDF document with drawings.

Aside from using LLM to summarize the former, a good strategy to review the documents (without falling asleep) is to look at the drawings for a visual overview, and then read the high-level sections, like the abstract, the background, and the claims, before the detailed description when necessary.

You might find the legalese hard to understand even though they are supposed to describe your invention. This is expected, as the the patent is often worded as a defense against infringement, so just make sure that the claims are broad enough to cover your invention but not too broad as to be non-patentable.

With SIGGRAPH, TVCG, NSF, and CHI I ended up reviewing 30+ submissions this month. It was quite some extra work, especially for an industry researcher who doesn’t have to serve on academic review committees. But I am glad that I would get (forced) to read topics that I usually would not, and really appreciate those who accepted my review invitations.

I am also surprised by the reluctance of some to review papers, especially for those who are in the academia whose careers depend on getting their own papers accepted and grants funded. If you are too busy to review other people’s submissions, you probably shouldn’t submit to begin with. Who should review yours then?