NeurIPS E&D: Should authors respond to ethical reviews during the discussion period? [D]
Mirrored from r/MachineLearning for archival readability. Support the source by reading on the original site.
We submitted a paper to the NeurIPS E&D track and received the official reviews. About a week later, we also received ethical review comments.
My question is about the review process rather than the content of the reviews.
During the current reviewer/AC/author discussion period (before Aug. 3), are authors expected to respond to the ethical reviewers in the same way as the official reviewers? Specifically, should we reply using the "Official Comment" feature, or are ethical reviews handled differently?
If anyone has experience with the E&D track or ethical reviews in previous NeurIPS cycles, I'd appreciate your insight.
Thanks!
[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.