Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

ElPelana OP t1_ja8nk9h wrote

Got my paper accepted!! Original scores: 1 weak accept, 1 borderline and 1 weak reject. After rebuttal, got 3 weak accepts.

21

synonymous1964 t1_ja8opaq wrote

Now I just need to hope that my Canadian visa doesn't actually take 209 days to process...

Honestly needing a visa to attend conferences is a big disadvantage - networking at conferences leads to future employment and research opportunities, and can have a huge impact on the career of early-stage researchers.

5

bballerkt7 t1_ja8qvcj wrote

Are the reviews public? If so, where can I see them? (I didn’t submit anything just curious to look through some reviews)

1

Unlikely_Tie8166 t1_ja8xpmh wrote

I once reviewed a cvpr submission that had overwhelmingly positive scores before rebuttal, and overwhelmingly negative after. Sometimes it's best to not do rebuttal at all lol

16

canbooo t1_ja9a5et wrote

I voted did not change because I wanted to see the results without biasing them too much. Do what you want with this info.

47

darth_sid_95 t1_ja9av9l wrote

Had 2 Borderlines and 1 Weak accept. After rebuttal, one of the borderline reviewers failed to updates that review, while the other two doubled down on their respective stances. Luckily, the decision was an Accept

2

Numerous_Tune_8320 t1_ja9wt5p wrote

First 3 3 2 (B B WR) -> after rebuttal 4 4 3 (WA WA B)

Finally my paper got ACCEPTED!

11

maximalentropy t1_jaaigzj wrote

I went from 443 to 422. The reviewers mentioned new concerns that they didn’t previously express and focused on one writing nit that could be fixed in one sentence or less. Is it worth emailing the AC? I feel the reviewers were biased or tried to drag down the scores for no good reason

1

AvailablePresent1113 t1_jablmv8 wrote

What a joke! I have a reviewer clearly champions for rejection and the two other reviews are completely yes-men. The rejecting reviewer did acknowledge some of my rebuttals, but then make some more non-sense excuses just to drag my paper down. The other reviewers just agree with anything he/she said without any clear stance. Seriously, I think there should be rules and restrictions for reviewers to say anything they conveniently want as "marginal"/"incremental"/...

1