Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

Indianprerogative t1_iz6pvos wrote

4, 2.5, 2. Will withdraw and submit to a workshop.

4

International-Rip958 t1_iz54x9m wrote

Can we use ChatGPT to generate better reviews? Just replace current random reviewers. Seems like some reviews in ML are even worse than the generated ones :P

2

Harry_Superman OP t1_iz6sfry wrote

3.5, 3.5, 3. Do I have a chance?

2

International-Rip958 t1_iz7z64m wrote

>3.5, 3.5, 3. Do I have a chance?

Got a paper with the same scores. I'd say it's around findings level. If the rebuttal can be done properly, it could enter the main.

2

SamChenPKU t1_iz807ps wrote

Does EACL have the "findings" track?

1

International-Rip958 t1_iz835tz wrote

>Does EACL have the "findings" track?

Findings Proceedings

October 15, 2022. We will accept papers to Findings proceedings in addition to main conference proceedings, in line with recent ACL conferences.

1

mathcircler t1_iz6xrqu wrote

Maybe anyone knows what was the distribution of scores for the accepted and rejected papers in the previous years? Or just the median score of the accepted papers?

2

Beginning-North4178 t1_iz7b35b wrote

+1

1

Beneficial-Study-209 t1_iz7fab7 wrote

Accepted paper received averaged score more than 3.3

2

mathcircler t1_iz94nco wrote

Is it based on personal experience or there is some stats? In the case of the latter, would greatly appreciate it if you could link the source. Thanks!

2

greekfiretime t1_iz8tz8n wrote

First-time author: 4.5, 3, 3. Is this enough for the main track?

2

snjf t1_iz9stiq wrote

4 4 3.5
The quality of the reviews are good :)

2

appadiyum_solalam t1_j0prnav wrote

Any idea when the final scores after rebuttal will be available? Will we come to know about it only when the final results are out?

2

MillionWays_ t1_iz81f0q wrote

Are all the scores out? Where are they available?

1

appadiyum_solalam t1_iz81qz7 wrote

Yes. Check in the softconf profile. You would have a received an email also. Some papers currently have 2 reviews only.

1

MillionWays_ t1_iz82tr6 wrote

I don't see anything on softconf. No email as well. Who does the email come from?

1

appadiyum_solalam t1_iz839m6 wrote

Maybe the reviews for ur paper are delayed. This can happen sometimes. The email came from this address: papers_eacl2023@softconf.com

2

life_work_balance t1_iz9141b wrote

First-time author: 3.5, 3.5, 2.5. Is there a chance for findings?

1

certain_entropy t1_iz93wkz wrote

First-time author here as well scores were 3.5, 1.5, 3. I'm assuming I have no shot at Findings either.

1

FaithlessnessRecent9 t1_iz9ckhb wrote

Hi, it means that you may have a shot convincing Rev 2 to raise their scores. It's not over until it's over, frankly. I managed to turn the odds a couple of times in similar situations.
Good luck

6

certain_entropy t1_iz9cu0z wrote

I appreciate the encouragement! Fingers crossed we'll see how it goes.

1

Unlucky-Difficulty86 t1_izqsfpr wrote

Do reviewers really read our response and raise the score? I never did this before so just want some opinions

1

atari202 t1_izlqdqc wrote

3.5 3 2.5 Do I have a chance? withdraw and submit to a workshop? I think it is not a minor review.

1

GodkillerArthur t1_izp9njn wrote

My scores are 3.5 3 and 2.5. The reviews seem to ask for additional experiments and clarifications regarding notation, but I do not see a place where this can be done. Could anyone please give me some advice on what I can do? Thanks!

1

user_11235813 t1_izwag5y wrote

I think regarding experiments you can do easy ones or of they are larger promise to add them to the camera-ready version (if you think it is feasible). Regarding notation you could just clarify questions in the response form, right? This might hep for formatting, as it mentions that superscript/subscript is possible: https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/165872/start-v2-softconf-what-markup-is-allowed-in-reviews

1