Neurips Position Track Rebuttal and Reviews [R]
Mirrored from r/MachineLearning for archival readability. Support the source by reading on the original site.
Hello! This is my first time submitting an actual conference paper (only done workshops so far).
Got a 3/3/5/7 for the Position Paper Track. Reviews all seem quite addressable. Meta review also seemed kinda positive? Included wording such as "a revision should include..." followed by actionable stuff we can take. Feels like there may be a shot.
My question is... what does that mean? We submit rebuttals for each reviewer. And I agree with a lot of the feedback. So thats not an issue. But what's going to happen? Do reviewers change their scores? Does the AC read each rebuttal to see if we'll make an adequate revision? How does all of this get judged? Who am I trying to convince here? And of what? And what should the wording be like in the rebuttal? More informal?
Sorry if some of these questions seem redundant!
[link] [comments]
More from r/MachineLearning
-
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
-
TMLR Relevance and Prestige [D]
Aug 13
-
Reproducible canvas-aligned low-level patterns in somerandomllm-generated images and their possible relation to iterative editing artifacts [D]
Aug 13
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.