hadn't realized I could dislike a slide this muchhttps://twitter.com/informusiccs/status/1199745085048606721 …
My first thought when I see this slide: What's the reproducibility of the selection process for a conference that accepts <15% of papers? If you have two program committees, would they select the same papers? Otherwise it's clearly just more random, not better.
-
-
They would not select any of the same papers, in my experience. Even the top conferences. It's pretty random. This is all the more reason to be on the TPC.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Ah, the experiment no-one likes to do! NIPS had a "shadow PC" for a while, I don't know if they published any of their data. I think the best data on this is: Conference Reviewing Considered Harmful https://homes.cs.washington.edu/~tom/support/confreview.pdf …
-
The graphs in the paper match my experience. Probably the "top" 5% of papers and the "bottom" 20% would be reasonably consistent, the rest is random with a slight weighting.
- Show replies
New conversation -
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.