Database Design and Implementation

Design an ER diagram for this application using CHENs notation, no other notation is acceptable and will not be graded. Write any unspecified requirements and any assumptions that you need to make the specification complete. In your ER diagram also identify all structural constraints.

Consider a Conference review database in which researchers submit their research papers for publication in the conference proceedings. Each paper is then reviewed by reviewers. Comments of these reviewers are recorded for use in the paper selection process. The database system caters primarily to reviewers who record answers to evaluation questions for each paper they review and make recommendations regarding whether to accept or reject the paper. The database requirements are summarized as follows. 1. Authors of papers are uniquely identified by Author Id, first and last name, affiliation, email address, phone number, and mailing address are also recorded. 2. Each paper is assigned a unique identifier and is described by its title, an abstract and the name of the file for the paper. 3. It is possible that - An author may have multiple papers in the conference. - A paper may have multiple authors. 4. Each paper has a contact author. However, - Although a paper may have multiple authors but only one of the authors will be the contact author for that paper. - An author can be a contact author for multiple papers. 5. Each paper needs to be submitted to the conference by an author. If a paper has multiple authors even, then only one of the authors will submit the paper. It is possible that an author may submit multiple papers. 6. It is also possible that an author submits a paper, but he/she is not the contact person for that paper. 7. The system also keeps track of the reviewers. Each reviewer is uniquely identified by the identifier. Each reviewer's first name, last name, email address, and affiliation are also recorded. Authors are not allowed to be reviewers. 8. Each reviewer is assigned multiple papers for review. Each paper is assigned, multiple reviewers. 9. A reviewer rates each paper assigned to him/her on a scale of 1 to 10 in four categories: technical merit, readability, originality, and relevance to the conference. Finally, each reviewer provides an overall recommendation (Accept or Reject) regarding each paper that he/she reviews. 10. Each review contains two types of written comments: one to be sent to the author and the other to be shared with the review committee chair only