« Back to Summary
Do you think the ICML2010 reviews were different in quality from those at related conferences?
#Response DateWhat conference are you comparing to and what is the subject area?
1Jun 10, 2010 7:01 PMCOLT, NIPS, theory, algorithms
2Jun 10, 2010 7:07 PMNIPS AISTATS
3Jun 10, 2010 8:27 PMECML-PKDD, KDD
4Jun 10, 2010 10:02 PMACL, NAACL: The NLPers tend to write longers reviews with more details, and be more polite.
5Jun 10, 2010 10:48 PMNIPS, Siggraph.
6Jun 10, 2010 10:51 PMI find NIPS marginally worse as far as craziness. COLT reviewers seem to be stronger, but their viewpoint often doesn't make sense w.r.t. what is significant work.
7Jun 11, 2010 1:09 AMECML/PKDD
8Jun 11, 2010 3:03 AMAAAI and SDM machine learning papers
9Jun 11, 2010 8:42 AMECML - Machine learning
10Jun 11, 2010 1:03 PMAgain, due to variance I don't dare to generalize...
11Jun 14, 2010 10:06 AMKDD'09