How does *ACL conferences acceptance work [D]
Mirrored from r/MachineLearning for archival readability. Support the source by reading on the original site.
Even after getting ARR reviews and a meta review, how is the acceptance decided at the *ACL venues, because I have seen meta review 3.5 getting to findings and 3 getting to main or even getting rejected. Then what is the purpose of the overall score and recommendation? What do the conferences see when deciding?
Do they only care about the metareview and their comments, or the whole set of reviews as well as along with the track in which the paper was submitted.
Anyone knowing the process please kindly tell.
Thank you [D]
[link] [comments]
More from r/MachineLearning
-
For the people who got reviews back from neurips, cvpr, eccv, etc and also tested their paper through an agentic reviewer like the stanford one, how different were the reviews? [D]
Aug 14
-
Building text to ASCII diffusion model , need advice and guidance [P]
Aug 14
-
A collision-entropy floor for watermark/retrieval AI-text detection. Looking for a sanity check before I take this further [D]
Aug 14
-
Are supervised and unsupervised learning still relevant today? [D]
Aug 14
Discussion (0)
Sign in to join the discussion. Free account, 30 seconds — email code or GitHub.
Sign in →No comments yet. Sign in and be the first to say something.