Machine Learning

1 readers

1 users here now

Community Rules:

Be nice. No offensive behavior, insults or attacks: we encourage a diverse community in which members feel safe and have a voice.
Make your post clear and comprehensive: posts that lack insight or effort will be removed. (ex: questions which are easily googled)
Beginner or career related questions go elsewhere. This community is focused in discussion of research and new projects that advance the state-of-the-art.
Limit self-promotion. Comments and posts should be first and foremost about topics of interest to ML observers and practitioners. Limited self-promotion is tolerated, but the sub is not here as merely a source for free advertisement. Such posts will be removed at the discretion of the mods.

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

communick@academy.garden

[D] AISTATS 2024 Paper Reviews (alien.top)

submitted 11 months ago by zy415@alien.top to c/machinelearning@academy.garden

51 comments fedilink hide all child comments

AISTATS 2024 paper reviews are supposed to be out today. I thought to create a discussion thread for us to discuss any issue/complain/celebration or anything else.

There is so much noise in the reviews every year. Some good work that the authors are proud of might get a low score because of the noisy system, given that AISTATS is growing large these years. We should keep in mind that the work is still valuable no matter what the score is.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Shot-Button-9010@alien.top 1 points 11 months ago (3 children)

worst reviews ever. Some of them even didn't read the paper. For example, a reviewer pointed out I have to cite another paper and kindly showed the title of it, which I've already included in the paper. And the reviewer gave me reject, with maximum confidence :)

[–] Optimal_dim@alien.top 1 points 11 months ago

Same things happened to me in NeurIPS/ ICLR : ( And they never showed up during rebuttal

[–] calvinreeve@alien.top 1 points 11 months ago

worst reviews ever.

one reviewer told us we missed a dot at the end of an equation. reject!

[–] Patient-Tell-491@alien.top 1 points 11 months ago

Similar. I said I ran five individual runs and reported the average results. However the reviewer asked me to show how many random seeds I used. It’s also a reject with max confidence :)