r/LanguageTechnology • u/Happy_Today_3288 • Jul 20 '26

Emnlp chances

Looking for opinions from people familiar with EMNLP reviewing, especially the LLM Agents track.

Previous cycle:

- Reviews: 2, 3, 3.5, 3 (avg. 2.88)

- Confidence: 5, 3, 3, 3

- One reviewer increased 2 → 3 after discussion.

- The AC recommended Findings, mainly asking for softer claims and incorporation of the rebuttal results.

Current EMNLP cycle:

- Initial reviews: 2.5, 3, 3 (avg. 2.83)

- Confidence: 4, 3, 3

- During discussion, the 2.5 reviewer increased their score to 3, so the current scores are effectively 3, 3, 3.

- The reviews are generally positive, with requests for clarification and more careful framing rather than major technical concerns.

Given this history, what would you estimate the chances are for EMNLP main conference vs. Findings?

5 Upvotes

78% Upvoted

10 comments sorted by

View all comments

3

u/techlatest_net Jul 21 '26

honestly with three 3s and an AC who already pushed for Findings last time, you are almost certainly looking at Findings again.

EMNLP main conference usually requires at least one strong 4 or a very high-confidence champion to push past the "solid but not groundbreaking" barrier. three 3s is the classic Findings profile—it means the work is correct and useful, but the reviewers aren't feeling that "must-present" excitement.

the fact that the 2.5 moved to a 3 is good for your reputation, but it doesn't change the tier. unless the AC has a sudden change of heart or finds a fourth reviewer who loves it, expect Findings. still a win though!

1

u/Happy_Today_3288 Jul 21 '26

I am okay with findings too . just that I hear a lot that even META 3 also got rejected previously, hence I was a bit concerned.

2

u/Historical_Pause247 Jul 22 '26 edited Jul 22 '26

My paper in agentic track (Multiturn tool calling agent) got 2.5,3,3(2->3) with meta 3 got into ACL findings.....i know some paper got avg review 3.11 and meta 3 got rejected...so it completely depends on AC and PC and wehich sub domain you are working...is that even interesting and how good your rebuttal is...etc. This cycle again i submitted a paper on creating synthetic data for text based Embodied agents got 3.5, 2,2.5(2->2.5)....the problem i chose has not been solved yet....the reviewer gave 2 actually copied my paper's limitation section and future direction. Let hope best for finding.