來源Reddit r/MachineLearning•較早收集於 20m
ICML 審稿人駁斥後降分
#conference-review#paper-submission#icml-2026icml-2026icmlopenreview
💡ICML 駁斥後分數反轉：拒稿訊號還是正常？投稿者必知。
⚡ 30 秒速覽
有什麼變化
審稿人認可駁斥後將分數提高至 5(3)
為什麼重要
揭示 ICML 審稿分數波動性，提醒研究者勿過度依賴駁斥成果，直至最終決定。
下一步行動
在 AC 討論期間頻繁檢查 OpenReview 的 ICML 分數更新。
誰應關注：Researchers & Academics
關鍵要點
- •審稿人認可駁斥後將分數提高至 5(3)
- •AC 審稿討論中分數降回 4
- •平均分從 4 降至 3.75，引發拒稿擔憂
🧠 深度解析
本篇為 AI 生成分析，非原文內容。
🔑 增強重點摘要
- •ICML 2026 utilizes a multi-stage review process where Area Chairs (ACs) have the authority to override or adjust reviewer scores based on private discussions, often leading to score volatility post-rebuttal.
- •The 'confidence' score (the number in parentheses) is a critical weighting factor in the final decision-making process, meaning a score drop from a high-confidence reviewer carries significantly more weight than a change from a low-confidence reviewer.
- •Community discourse on platforms like OpenReview and Reddit suggests that 'score sniping' or late-stage score adjustments by ACs are a recurring point of contention in top-tier AI conference peer review cycles.
🔮 前景展望基於引用來源的 AI 分析
ICML will implement stricter transparency requirements for AC score adjustments.
Increasing community pressure regarding the lack of visibility into post-rebuttal score changes is likely to force policy updates in future conference cycles.
The reliance on numerical scores for paper acceptance will decrease.
The volatility of scores during the AC discussion phase highlights the inadequacy of simple averaging as a proxy for scientific merit, prompting a shift toward more qualitative assessment models.
⏳ 時間線
2026-01
ICML 2026 paper submission deadline.
2026-03
Initial reviewer scores released to authors.
2026-04
Rebuttal phase concluded and AC discussion period initiated.
📰
AI 週報
閱讀本週精選 AI 大事摘要 →
👉相關動態
AI 策展新聞聚合。所有內容版權歸原始發布者所有。
原始來源： Reddit r/MachineLearning ↗
每週電子報
每週一封，可隨時退訂。