This is really unacceptable!
@ICLR18 should do something about this, surely?
-
-
AFAICT It's an open review system so the results are freely available for anyone to see. https://openreview.net/forum?id=ry_WPG-A …-
2 replies 0 retweets 7 likes -
Replying to @alex__morley @o_guest and
Thanks, I had no idea. This seems bizarre to me but I guess not others.
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @ProfData @alex__morley and
It takes a while to get your head around I agree! Submissions are open, and the review comments and discussion are open, but through that whole process the identity of the authors and reviewers remains hidden. http://www.iclr.cc/doku.php?id=iclr2018:conference_cfp …
1 reply 1 retweet 3 likes -
Replying to @adriancolyer @ProfData and
It's surprising because open everything without an author name nor DOI makes me think credit can't be (easily) attributed to the authors neither via e.g., Google scholar (cites, for the REF, etc.) nor altmetrics (blogs about their work, Mendelay adds, tweets, etc).
1 reply 1 retweet 3 likes -
Replying to @o_guest @adriancolyer and
Also unlike with preprints, which have names and DOIs or some ID (arXiv), the public PDF on this setup has neither an ID nor author names. It's open to abuse, if understand it correctly since I can see malevolent actors as well as just mistakes leading to copying anonymous' work.
1 reply 1 retweet 2 likes -
Replying to @o_guest @adriancolyer and
I suppose it's not being abused since it's still in use. But open at the time of commenting and double blinding seems a strange combination to me, for the reasons I just mentioned.
1 reply 1 retweet 2 likes -
Replying to @o_guest @adriancolyer and
I also noticed they allow preprints. What's the point of double blind if they allow preprints? If the point is to make it a level playing field then obviously a lab with a good reputation will "unlevel" the playing field by unanonymising themselves with a preprint.
1 reply 1 retweet 4 likes -
Replying to @o_guest @adriancolyer and
Anyway, it's just my thoughts on this since I've never seen this combination of open at the time of review and double blind. Thanks for explaining it. If I ever submit to such a conference I'll be prepared!
1 reply 1 retweet 1 like -
Obviously it’s unblinded if accepted. So it’s just this weird period right now of being able to talk about it, but not cite it. In normal circumstances I would wait to cover such a paper, this one is an odd exception.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
Yeah, if not accepted though it's in a kind of limbo. And even more vulnerable, I'd say.
-
-
That’s a really good point. Zombie papers!
0 replies 0 retweets 3 likesThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.