Samir's updates to the notes, emailed to me on 2008-09-12.

diff --git a/notes b/notes
index 8317707..aca2880 100644 (file)
--- a/notes
+++ b/notes
@@ -1,3 +1,4 @@
+Assignment problems arise in a variety of settings.  
 For funding agencies such as NSF program directors 
 that co-ordinate panels, assigning proposals to 
 reviewers is a major challenge. It is important that each proposal be
@@ -7,18 +8,16 @@ issue arises for a program committee chair, who may have to assign
 literally hundreds of papers to a program committee consisting of
 thirty to forty program committee members. 
 
-What does CMT use? What does Easychair use?
+{\em What does CMT use? What does Easychair use?}
 
 From now on we will focus on the problem of assigning papers to
 reviewers. 
 We assume that each reviewer is given access to the
 list of papers to be reviewed, and provides input on their
 preferences by giving a ``desirability'' score to each paper.
-We also assume that each paper  has to be reviewed by $at least r$
+We also assume that each paper  has to be reviewed by $r$
 reviewers. 
 
-List of codes.
-
 We do not consider stable marriage type preference lists,
 because a strict ranking of papers would be rather tedious
 to produce. In this scheme, the papers are essentially grouped
@@ -50,3 +49,10 @@ that are the ``most desirable'' from their point of view.
 
 {\em Stinkers} are papers that pretty much no-one wanted to review. 
 We would like to spread the load of the stinkers as evenly as possible.
+ 
+\section{Formulation as a Min Cost Flow Problem}
+
+\section{Experimental Results} 
+ 
+\section{Conclusions}
+