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!

59

Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

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

74

csirac t1_it57iu9 wrote

Two accepts and borderline reject (7,7,4). Chances?

18

csirac t1_it5ceum wrote

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.

6

3kberockin t1_it5lrh4 wrote

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.

8

loooompen t1_it5z9to wrote

Two WAs and two BAs (6, 6, 5, 5). any chance?

5

zodiacg t1_it60k41 wrote

Is there a review guideline? I don't guite get the difference between "weak" and "borderline"

8

loooompen t1_it67ixm wrote

Does anybody know last year's acceptance threshold?

3

luiui490 t1_it6adwl wrote

What are the chances for Weak Accept, Borderline Reject and Reject with two reviewers having positive reviews and the third reviewer can be rebutted?

5

Simping4Kaiming t1_it6i0rf wrote

I got accept, accept, reject. Chances ? I assume this is a 773 ? Does anyone know last year's cutoff ?

3

dyliu t1_it6lh8q wrote

got (8, 7, 5, 4)... the reviewer who gave 4 is really aggressive

3

andreichiffa t1_it73a2y wrote

Got 3, but tbh the reviewer #8 likely have not read the paper, given their comments.

2

WannabeMachine t1_it754pt wrote

Accept, Weak Accept, Reject, Reject. Social impact track. :(

4

userwithoutnam t1_it7p9pf wrote

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).

2

Roger_Perfect t1_it7t7k7 wrote

Accept(7), Borderline Accept(5), Borderline Accept(5)

Chances?? T_T

1

Proper-Wishbone-4164 t1_it82u11 wrote

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!

3

themoderndayhercules t1_it8cxny wrote

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!

1

userwithoutnam t1_it8k3uv wrote

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.

3

singularpanda t1_it8kttq wrote

I got a strong rejection with only a few sentences of weakness. Never seen this before. Seems the reviewer gets extremely angry.

1

userwithoutnam t1_itb0udr wrote

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?

5

neuripsauthora t1_itbl9er wrote

How good are chances on :

Strong accept, Weak accept, Borderline accept,Borderline reject.

1

Equivalent_Mud5901 t1_itdrqof wrote

What about weak accept, borderline accept, borderline reject, reject (this one has really poor comments though)

2

Nameless1995 t1_itej85o wrote

> 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.

4

Nameless1995 t1_itevff4 wrote

>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)

2

deadendtux t1_itfcnvm wrote

Does anyone know if the camera-ready version will allow one extra page?

2

Nameless1995 t1_itft97w wrote

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.

1

zodiacg t1_itgdnro wrote

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 :(

1

Pale-Tank2788 t1_iti8g7h wrote

Is October 24, 11:59 PM UTC-12 the deadline?

It's different from the website (October 23), so it's confusing.

3

DiscombobulatedTax27 t1_itk5nd0 wrote

All 4 reviews are borderline accept (5). The "please use sparingly" suggestion was definitely used sparingly. Chances?

1

Suitable-Musician319 t1_itk707i wrote

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.

2

gneon t1_itlkdmg wrote

What are my chances with (7,7,6,6)?

0

Intelligent-Dish-293 t1_itn2d6j wrote

I got 4 reviews:
borderline accept (Somewhat knowledgeable)
borderline accept (Mostly knowledgeable)
weak accept (Somewhat knowledgeable)

accept (Mostly knowledgeable).

Can you estimate my chances?

2

meteoseeker t1_itr0ozd wrote

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... )

1