Submitted by CauseRevolutionary59 t3_y9d6f6 in MachineLearning
Looks like AAAI has sent out an email saying reviews are up on CMT. Anybody else only have two reviews? I was expecting to have four, but they said in the email that 69% of papers have 4 or more and 96% have three or more. Guess I'm in the 4% with fewer than three!
Most AAAI reviewers are grad students. What else would you expect.
isn't it the case pretty much everywhere? don't most profs just pass their reviews to their students?
When I was a grad student I got the review requests directly. I'd venture my reviews were probably better than my professor's---he's write 2-3 sentences at most.
getting requests as a student is a thing too, but on top of that, professors also pass their own reviews as well :)
Is there a "spin again" button?
I think you want (7, 7, 7) for the award.
[deleted]
Two accepts and borderline reject (7,7,4). Chances?
I would think decent chances with a strong rebuttal. Need to flip that 4 to 5 or above.
[deleted]
I had 1 review (rating: Accept, expertise: Expert). Not sure if more emergency reviews will be available before the response deadline, or whether the paper can get rejected due to lack of reviews.
A single reviewer on a paper?! I thought the minimum was 2.
Is there a review guideline? I don't guite get the difference between "weak" and "borderline"
> Award quality: Technically flawless paper with groundbreaking impact on one or more areas of AI, with exceptionally strong evaluation, reproducibility, and resources, and no unaddressed ethical considerations. Top 2% of accepted papers.
> Very Strong Accept: Technically flawless paper with groundbreaking impact on at least one area of AI or excellent impact on multiple areas of AI, with flawless quality, reproducibility, resources, and no unaddressed ethical considerations. Top 15% of accepted papers.
> Strong Accept: Technically strong paper with, with novel ideas, high impact on at least one area of AI, with excellent quality, reproducibility, resources, and no unaddressed ethical considerations. Top 30% of accepted papers.
> Accept: Technically solid paper, with high impact on at least one sub-area of AI or modest-to-high impact on more than one area of AI, with good to excellent quality, reproducibility, and if applicable, resources, and no unaddressed ethical considerations. Top 60% of accepted papers.
> Weak Accept: Technically solid, modest-to-high impact paper, with no major concerns with respect to quality, reproducibility, and if applicable, resources, ethical considerations.
> Borderline accept: Technically solid paper where reasons to accept, e.g., good novelty, outweigh reasons to reject, e.g., fair quality. Please use sparingly.
> Borderline reject: Technically solid paper where reasons to reject, e.g., poor novelty, outweigh reasons to accept, e.g. good quality. Please use sparingly.
> Reject: For instance, a paper with poor quality, inadequate reproducibility, incompletely addressed ethical considerations.
> Strong Reject: For instance, a paper with poor quality, limited impact, poor reproducibility, mostly unaddressed ethical considerations.
> Very Strong Reject: For instance, a paper with trivial results, limited novelty, poor impact, or unaddressed ethical considerations.
No communication among reviewers
Two WAs and two BAs (6, 6, 5, 5). any chance?
What are the chances for Weak Accept, Borderline Reject and Reject with two reviewers having positive reviews and the third reviewer can be rebutted?
How do people make a strong rebuttal in only 5000 characters?
I have to answer 12 questions. This leaves ~50-100 words per answer. Do people ignore some questions and focus on more important questions?
Am I missing something?
Accept, Weak Accept, Reject, Reject. Social impact track. :(
Does anybody know last year's acceptance threshold?
>This year we received a record 9,251 submissions, of which 9,020 were reviewed. Based on a thorough and rigorous review process we have accepted 1,349 papers. This yields an overall acceptance rate of 15%.
(from last year)
I got accept, accept, reject. Chances ? I assume this is a 773 ? Does anyone know last year's cutoff ?
got (8, 7, 5, 4)... the reviewer who gave 4 is really aggressive
[removed]
Got Accept (7), Borderline Reject (4), Reject (3).
When they can't say anything about novelty or the writing they blame you for not having enough experiments or lack of theoretical results! I don't understand these conferences, the reviews you get is like a coin toss!
Is the rebuttal really limited to 5000 characters? This is hardly enough to respond to a single reviewer, let alone 4. This is such a disappointment compared to NeurIPS, where the rebuttal/author discussion format was significantly more pleasurable to deal with.
Is October 24, 11:59 PM UTC-12 the deadline?
It's different from the website (October 23), so it's confusing.
Some question here. It seems all the corresponding authors receive an email saying so, but my Pf is out of town so I'm not sure and confused.
English is not my native language. What is Pf?
Professor lol, which is our paper’s corresponding author
>Professor lol, which is our paper’s corresponding author
I want to check if I can edit it after submitting it, but I'm afraid to try. Are you too?
Meanwhile, editing was possible in BMVC. Is the function of CMT the same regardless of conference?
The Edit author feedback option is available after I have submitted my rebuttal.
That's the answer i wanted.
You’re very kind.
[deleted]
Amazing! The reviewers can see each other's identities
[deleted]
Hopefully you will get at least one more review. Write a good rebuttal and hope you can get one of them to increase their score.
I had a paper rejected with all positive reviews a few years ago -- the meta reviewer said none of the reviewers had felt strongly about the paper or engaged in discussion.
[deleted]
Got 3, but tbh the reviewer #8 likely have not read the paper, given their comments.
Is there a guide and/or latex template for the rebuttal? Or do we simply submit raw text in the "post author feedback" text box?
I did not receive any email correspondence from AAAI (my co-author made the original submission but is unavailable for the review period).
I think plain text if fine
Is there a rebuttal guideline at all?
I'm actually looking for it, and can't find, are there 5000 words in total?
The rebuttal submission text box only allows for 5000 *characters*, which is hardly sufficient to rebut 4 reviews.
my bad characters instead of words, thanks a lot
The raw text format is awkward. Last year, the rebuttal format was one page for a pdf file (in my case, writing in latex).
What about weak accept, borderline accept, borderline reject, reject (this one has really poor comments though)
Does anyone know if the camera-ready version will allow one extra page?
[deleted]
Hi, This is my first submission and is sole author. Looking for advice/suggestions.
I got (6,6,4,4). R6 did not see supplementary and has marked "poor" in reporducibility but gave 6. R8 has not understood the paper.
I have pointed out to R6 to see supplementary and raised comment about R8 to senior committee member. What are my chances?
Thank you.
I got 4 reviews:
borderline accept (Somewhat knowledgeable)
borderline accept (Mostly knowledgeable)
weak accept (Somewhat knowledgeable)
accept (Mostly knowledgeable).
Can you estimate my chances?
Not too bad.
Chances with (6,5,4,5)?
[deleted]
[removed]
[deleted]
[deleted]
[deleted]
Accept(7), Borderline Accept(5), Borderline Accept(5)
Chances?? T_T
enjoy
There are some chances.
What's the probability?? 50%?
I don't know. Probably would depend on your paper genre, what kind of scores other papers are getting and so on, what kind of cut-off they decide upon etc. I looked back at my previous submissions. We had a paper from AAAI2022 with the same scores as yours and it was rejected.
Got some really badly written reviews this year. One of them especially stood out, the reviewer mansplained how our paper is the result of the most basic result in our field (stuff I show to high-school students in pop-science lectures), and doesn't understand why we need to spend so much time developing our tools, which they also confused with other existing tools. The reviewer marked him/her-self as the most knowledgable of all of our reviewers! Real Dunning-Kruger in action. It's actually so bad that I'm hopeful our response will flip it upside-down (or rather downside-up?): Imagine the shock of finding that a seemingly trivial result is actually untrue, but that with novel tools a more nuanced result can be developed!
I got a strong rejection with only a few sentences of weakness. Never seen this before. Seems the reviewer gets extremely angry.
such reviewer is just a joke
[deleted]
How good are chances on :
Strong accept, Weak accept, Borderline accept,Borderline reject.
enjoy!
[deleted]
[deleted]
[deleted]
7,7,6,5. I'm still worried as I'm doing NLP.
At first I got 3 reviews (7,6,6). I almost finished my rebuttal and ready to submit. Suddenly there is a new review scoring 5. Now I have to squeeze more into the 5000 characters :(
[removed]
[deleted]
All 4 reviews are borderline accept (5). The "please use sparingly" suggestion was definitely used sparingly. Chances?
got (7655)，chances? T T
three novelty good, one novelty poor; all agree with: method effective, proved by extensive experiment
7 knowledgable, somewhat confident. 2 weaknesses, easy to answer
6 very knowledgeable, quite confident. give many positive comments. leave two questions, not easy to discuss.
5 somewhat knowledgable, not very confident. novelty poor, want direct proof of our idea which is hard T T. a misunderstood weakness (can be answered)
5 knowledgable, Somewhat confident. question some flaws of the techniques (very difficult to answer, and there are only 5000 characters... )
What are my chances with (7,7,6,6)?
RedTachyon t1_it560q1 wrote
I got 3 reviews - reject, award level, and borderline reject... I don't even know at this point. Guess this translates to (3, 10, 4)? Peer review truly is a lottery