  Many conferences rely on paper bidding as a key component of their reviewer
assignment procedure. These bids are then taken into account when assigning
reviewers to help ensure that each reviewer is assigned to suitable papers.
However, despite the benefits of using bids, reliance on paper bidding can
allow malicious reviewers to manipulate the paper assignment for unethical
purposes (e.g., getting assigned to a friend's paper). Several different
approaches to preventing this manipulation have been proposed and deployed. In
this paper, we enumerate certain desirable properties that algorithms for
addressing bid manipulation should satisfy. We then offer a high-level analysis
of various approaches along with directions for future investigation.
