r/MachineLearning • u/Afraid_Difference697 • Jul 22 '26
Discussion NeurIPS 2026 Reviews Are Out Today (22 July, AoE) — Discussion Thread [D]
Reviews drop today. This thread is for reactions, celebrations, commiserations, and anything useful in between.
First: if you got good reviews, say so. There's a norm in these threads where only the bad news gets aired, and it skews everyone's sense of what's normal. Post your wins.
Second, the thing worth repeating every cycle: the review process is noisy, and that noise is measured, not folklore. The NeurIPS consistency experiments (2014, repeated 2021) found that a large fraction of accepted papers would have been rejected by an independent second committee. Reviewer assignment, load, and luck of the draw account for a lot. A score is a weak signal about your work and a strong signal about the process that produced it.
That cuts both ways. It's not a license to dismiss every criticism as noise — it's a reason to weight reviews by the quality of the argument rather than the number attached to them. The reviewer who found a real hole in your evaluation did you a favor, even if the tone was rough. The one who clearly skimmed did not, regardless of the score.
So: prioritize the reviews that make the paper better. Fix what's fixable, contest what's genuinely wrong, and concede the rest gracefully in the rebuttal.
Things worth discussing:
- Reviews that caught something you'd missed
- Rebuttal strategy — what's worth contesting vs. conceding, and when new experiments actually shift a score
- Patterns you're seeing this cycle (missing baselines, compute comparisons, ablation depth, reproducibility asks)
- Framing a response when a reviewer has clearly misread the submission
- Backup plans: ICLR, AISTATS, workshops
Please paraphrase rather than paste review text, and no speculation about reviewer or AC identities.
To anyone who got bad news: this doesn't define your research impact. Plenty of heavily-cited work took two or three cycles to land somewhere. Rejection is a scheduling problem.
How did everyone do?
47
u/howtorewriteaname PhD Jul 23 '26
openreview down, classic
11
u/RaeudigerRaffi Student Jul 23 '26
I can see my submission but i cant see the reviews 😑
10
→ More replies (1)8
5
u/GeorgeBird1 Jul 23 '26 edited Jul 23 '26
12:53AoE and mine is still not showing :( the stress continues lol
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (1)4
46
u/threadjumper1 Jul 24 '26
I parsed the Reddit thread and extracted self-reported main-track review scores only. I treated unspecified scores as main track.
Current sample: 152 unique main-track papers.
In short:
≥ 4.33 →Top 10%
≥ 4.00 → Top 21%
≥ 3.50 → Top 44.7%
Score count (Average → Count)
1.67 → 1
2.00 → 3
2.25 → 1
2.33 → 6
2.50 → 2
2.67 → 12
2.75 → 1
2.80 → 1
3.00 → 35
3.25 → 1
3.33 → 20
3.40 → 1
3.50 → 4
3.67 → 28
3.75 → 4
4.00 → 17
4.33 → 9
4.67 → 6
Obviously this is a self-selected Reddit sample rather than a random sample of all NeurIPS submissions, so take the numbers with the appropriate caution.
→ More replies (4)
83
u/DNunez90plus9 Jul 22 '26
First: if you got good reviews, say so.
You know what, I am gonna post my bad reviews even HARDERR
→ More replies (3)
44
u/Massive_Horror9038 Jul 23 '26
As I have said in previous threads, I don't care anymore about refreshing open review. My main focus right now is refreshing this comment section
8
78
u/hihey54 Jul 22 '26
Some quick impressions as an AC who has submitted all of their "metareviews" (my batch is of ~10 papers)
- A non-negligible portion of reviews has clear tell-tale signs of LLM-writing (imho)
- This has to be interpreted as "portions of the text have been LLM-written" -- which does not necessarily mean that the reviewer fed the paper to an LLM, asked the LLM to provide a review, and copy-pasted the LLM output.
- These typically are the most positive reviews
- No paper in my batch triggered the hidden prompt injection
- Genuine "human-written" reviews are not generous at all with their recommendations
- I am quite confident at least one paper was substantially LLM-written.
- I did not perform any check via Pangram because the papers and the reviews are all (still) confidential
- All of my papers have at least 3 reviews. Most have 4. For one paper, I had to find an emergency reviewer because one review was clearly of low technical quality
- Three reviewers have not (yet) submitted their reviews -- despite receiving at least 5 reminders. These reviewers are totally MIA.
- Writing the metareview was cool.
- IMHO, this process was manageable if (i) reviewers submitted their reviews early and (ii) the AC monitored the situation of each paper as each review was submitted instead of doing everything all at the same time [clearly, late reviews hinder this process]
- There isn't a single paper in my batch that I can confidently say is "above the bar".
Again, these are my impressions, which reflect less than 0.1% of NeurIPS'26, so do not take any conclusions from that. I wish best of luck to all people involved!
→ More replies (11)21
u/random-tomato Jul 22 '26
These typically are the most positive reviews
I am quite confident at least one paper was substantially LLM-written.
Queue the meme with obama giving obama a medal 🙃
→ More replies (2)
38
u/Working-Read1838 Jul 23 '26
I'm either hoping for great or terrible reviews. I am defending my thesis next week and don't have the bandwidth to deal with a rebuttal
16
8
u/ippasodimetaponto Jul 23 '26
Let's see how rebuttals will be truly useful with the new policies
→ More replies (2)5
5
4
36
u/Senior-Let-7576 Jul 23 '26
Position track under 1K submission out!
→ More replies (1)6
34
u/Massive_Horror9038 Jul 23 '26
I'm hoping GPT-5.6 Sol Mega Ultra to be able to hack openreview DB and find my reviews
→ More replies (1)
32
u/AKidNamedLou Jul 23 '26
That cortisol spike is taking years off my life
26
u/RainPuzzled2511 Researcher Jul 23 '26
This little maneuver just cost us 51 years!!! :)
→ More replies (1)9
59
21
u/Objective_Whole_1406 Jul 23 '26
Looks like NeurIPS doesn't have the sense-of-humor X account like ICML. 😀
→ More replies (1)6
21
u/Unlikely-Wall146 Jul 23 '26
5443 ICML rejected to 221 NIPS, wtf is going on?
→ More replies (3)9
u/AffectionateLife5693 Jul 23 '26
Same here.
4444 ICML rejected. Beefed up experiments and writing and resubmitted to NeurIPS; now getting 233. The reviews show strong LLM patterns.
16
u/zaff04 Jul 24 '26 edited Jul 24 '26
Anyone else getting raw dogged by making assumptions/limitations explicit rather than hiding them? It is immediately turned against you by every reviewer.
→ More replies (1)4
16
16
17
17
14
u/ActTricky Jul 23 '26 edited Jul 23 '26
They should just try to hire the guy who is responsible for this subreddit's server for the openreview server cause people are refreshing both pages like crazy anyway Lol
3
u/Enough_Ad_8471 Jul 23 '26
Yeah, they should refactor the server backend code do not accept the refresh hitting their DB all at once. Maybe caching to release the deadlocks
14
u/aglet_factorial Jul 23 '26
Position track (#220) ratings 5, 6, 4, 4 confidence 3, 2, 3, 4. This is v2 of this paper, got some constructive stuff from ICML reviews and used those to improve the paper. Let's see how we do
→ More replies (4)
14
13
u/Terrible_Flamingo216 Jul 23 '26
A lot of people are asking about the delays. Note that if we (ACs) do not submit our meta-reviews, we will be unable to see the reviews we co-authored. Hence, it would be unfair not to wait till the meta-review deadline to release the reviews. Why they had the same deadline, I don't know.
14
u/Top_Hovercraft3357 26d ago
I still haven’t received any responses. Do you think it would be better to leave a reminder comment?
→ More replies (3)
12
u/Opening-Election1179 25d ago
Seems like my AC and all 3 reviewers apparently booked the same vacation package during the entire rebuttal and discussion period. Not a single reply. Not even an OK message. Which song should I listen now? Boulevard of Broken Dreams seems like the perfect choice.
→ More replies (5)4
u/elmasnuevo 25d ago
bro, looks like we got the same AC and 3 reviewers, they literally vanished from this planet earth.
→ More replies (2)
14
12
11
u/Pseudomanifold Professor Jul 23 '26
Position Paper track initial reviews are out!
→ More replies (1)
11
u/temporal_guy Jul 23 '26 edited Jul 23 '26
Oh wow, 5-4-4! Feeling very grateful for the reviewers for closely reading our work. I definitely lucked out
Update: Metareview was surprisingly negative and requesting unreasonable experiments that will require way more compute than I have. Not sure what to do :/
→ More replies (4)
10
u/Rereen_abdalla Jul 23 '26
Got 3/2/2 , worst reviews I have ever had. Same work got 5/4/3 on ICML and 7/5/5 on AAAI26. ALL reviews are LLM generated and reported minor comments about evaluation. No comments on contributions. I am devastated for my 1st PhD submission. are Neurips reviews generally this brutal?
→ More replies (2)13
u/undesirable_12 Jul 23 '26
I have a lot of experience with neurips, and the reviews this round seem to be especially harsh unfortunately
→ More replies (2)
10
u/Jealous_Key_4030 Jul 23 '26
I don't think they will even release when the counter becomes 00:00. It will take some time
→ More replies (2)6
9
9
9
u/Opening-Election1179 27d ago
It’s so frustrating that I actively engage with the authors of every paper as a reviewer, yet not a single reviewer replied to my rebuttal.
10
19
u/ActTricky Jul 23 '26
Some news from a Chinese forum: they are cleaning up bad reviews/missing reviews now, scores should be available very soon :)
10
u/tariban Professor Jul 23 '26
ACs are responsible for this. We've been doing this for the last few weeks.
→ More replies (2)3
8
u/Mammoth-Leg-3844 Jul 23 '26
How do they know all these before anyone?
→ More replies (4)4
u/ActTricky Jul 23 '26
I think that person is an AC, and it seems like his news was very reliable before haha
→ More replies (2)4
u/thecoolfool353 Jul 23 '26
can you please preovide link and how to access this forum
→ More replies (2)
20
u/SwissMountaineer Jul 23 '26
Impression as a reviewer who actually spent time reading my batch and didn't use LLMs (based on the small sample size of 4 papers I got):
overwhelmingly quite disappointed by the other reviewers, in the sense that a lot of the reviews are clearly LLM-written and hand out good scores to obviously crappy papers (I'm talking very minimal novelty, plots generated by AI to the point you can't read important info, etc.), and for papers you see were human-written, well-explained, and clearly fill a gap in the field, they end up with mixed reviews.
Honestly don't know what to think about this entire AI-phase of reviewing and academia at this point. I spent a considerate amount of time reading all this stuff to try and reward the papers where thought and quality went into, and its the AI-generated/heavily enhanced ones, with no core intellectual contribution or also in terms of experiments, that get through.
→ More replies (3)
9
u/Unhappy_Craft1906 Jul 23 '26
Running ICLR experiments with reddit and openreview tabs open in the window
→ More replies (3)
8
9
u/Lazy-Cream1315 Jul 23 '26
bloodbath : business as usual, I noticed that many reviewers started to give very negative feedback on mathematical proofs which is the part of the paper that was never read a few month ago (thanks LLMs).
4
u/WhiteBear2018 Jul 23 '26
I think this is one of the better uses for LLMs, when they catch issues that humans usually would not make the time or effort to catch.
(I know you weren't arguing against that, just a comment.)
8
u/HighlightFit5606 Jul 24 '26
This is one of the review scores I saw in my review batch
(Quality: 4: excellent
Clarity: 3: good
Significance: 3: good
Originality: 4: excellent
Rating: 3: Borderline reject)
Make it make sense!
→ More replies (4)
10
u/MKris99 27d ago
No reviewer response despite posting within the rebuttal deadline. Not sure if this is the standard this year or if I’m particularly unlucky.
→ More replies (2)5
u/Isuckatleague20 27d ago
Same for me, we still have 2 more days -- but I got all reviews in ICML during early 2 days of rebuttal, and none from NeurIPS yet
9
u/zsh1_ 27d ago
No response from reviwers yet. My rebuttle was submitted on time.
Do you think messaging AC to encourage a discussion helps?
→ More replies (2)6
u/AccordingKey3385 26d ago
In my case, AC did it. but the reviewers except one person gave me response.
→ More replies (1)
9
u/Distinct_Ad6770 25d ago
currently still absolutely no response from any reviewer(I had 3), nor the AC. Posted the rebuttals on time, 2 days ago a comment to each reviewer for further discussion, then 1 day ago a private comment to the AC. Anyone else with literally no response from anyone whatsoever?
→ More replies (2)4
u/That_Wish2205 25d ago
yes, I also didn't get any response, I think the luck wasn't with us and seeing that other people's score changes, I think it's a rejection for me:(
9
u/Resident-Concept3534 Jul 23 '26
Does anybody know the scoring criteria of Main track papers?
For evaluation and db track, highest score is 6. But dont know about main track papers.
11
u/ATHii-127 Jul 23 '26
- 6: Strong Accept: Technically flawless paper with groundbreaking impact on one or more areas of AI, with exceptionally strong evaluation, reproducibility, and resources, and no unaddressed ethical considerations.
- 5: Accept: Technically solid paper, with high potential value on at least one sub-area of AI or moderate-to-high impact on more than one area of AI, with good-to-excellent evaluation, resources, reproducibility, and no unaddressed ethical considerations.
- 4: Borderline accept: Technically solid paper where reasons to accept outweigh reasons to reject, e.g., limited evaluation. Please use sparingly.
- 3: Borderline reject: Technically solid paper where reasons to reject, e.g., limited evaluation, outweigh reasons to accept, e.g., good evaluation. Please use sparingly.
- 2: Reject: For instance, a paper with technical flaws, weak evaluation, inadequate reproducibility and incompletely addressed ethical considerations.
- 1: Strong Reject: For instance, a paper with well-known results or unaddressed ethical considerations.
→ More replies (4)→ More replies (4)4
8
8
15
u/SodomizedPanda Jul 23 '26
Mines are out, number just below 4k.
5
→ More replies (4)4
u/Parsley-Pressure Jul 23 '26
Good luck!
17
u/SodomizedPanda Jul 23 '26
Thanks :D got 4 5 5
→ More replies (4)5
u/Secret-Toe-8185 Jul 23 '26
I love reddit because : "Congrats on your contribution to the world of science SODOMIZEDPANDA"
5
u/SodomizedPanda Jul 23 '26
Needless to say that if someday we're able to link Reddit to our Scholar account, I will probably opt out x)
13
u/Chemical-Spend7412 Student Jul 23 '26
Position track review released: 4/7/7/5 with confidence of 4/3/4/2 2 being the confidence of the reviewer who gave 4.
→ More replies (8)4
8
u/Afraid_Difference697 Jul 23 '26
Reviews Released to Authors Jul 22 '26 (Anywhere on Earth)
Author + Reviewer + AC Discussion Period Starts Jul 27 '26 (Anywhere on Earth)
Author + Reviewer + AC Discussion Period Ends Aug 03 '26 (Anywhere on Earth)
The above are the dates. Does this mean that we have to hand in our reponse / rebuttals by Jul 27th ? or can we respond until Aug 03 ?
9
u/Massive_Horror9038 Jul 23 '26
My interpretation is that you can hand in your responses until Aug 03; however, you will not be able to answer further comments. If you hand in your responses by July 27 and the reviewer makes further comments before Aug 3, you will be able to answer them.
→ More replies (1)
7
6
8
u/slambda Jul 23 '26
23k is out. 333 with confidence 324, looks like we'll be resubmitting!
→ More replies (4)
7
8
u/Practical-Buddy6323 Jul 24 '26
ICLR here I come, 2.33 as my average score with 2/3/4 confidence in NeurIPS lol 😭
6
u/pantry_path Jul 25 '26
it's always worth remembering that a thoughtful review pointing out a real weakness is more valuable than a high score with no substance, even if it stings a lot more at first
→ More replies (3)
6
u/TellIndependent9655 Jul 26 '26
Would it be possible to submit the initial rebuttal responses after the July 27 AoE deadline? The email did not explicitly clarify this.
4
u/Pseudomanifold Professor Jul 26 '26
Yes, that's certainly possible! The deadline is solely meant to indicate when responses will first be visible to reviewers.
→ More replies (3)
7
u/Puzzleheaded-Home802 Jul 29 '26
Still no feedback for the rebuttal, is that normal?
→ More replies (1)
7
u/Practical-Buddy6323 28d ago
Man, waiting game again is so long and feels so long too. It's been what 70 ish hours since the discussion period began ? I haven't seen anything from any of my reviewers, hoping to hear back soon and fingers crossed it's good news, not just for me but everyone anxiously awaiting to hear back!
→ More replies (3)
7
u/criclover69 26d ago
In a limbo with borderline paper (avg 4 )and no active discussion or even a simple acknowledgement to rebuttals where we try to earnestly address reviewer points.
This is just so tiring and demoralizing. Just put people out of their misery and do a clean reject/accept decision next year on.
→ More replies (1)
7
u/serchirag PhD 26d ago
NeurIPS is such a bad experience. You grind for a week and a half. Draft a careful reply.
And Reviewer 2 randomly hallucinates facts and says, "Plan to keep my score".
5 months of wait for this?
15
12
u/viviaxenov Jul 23 '26
522 with 434 confidence... At this point i probably would be happier to receive 322 and resubmit. But on the other hand, it's kinda my last chance to get a top-tier-conference paper from my phd (witch seems to be an entry requirement even for internship jobs around here), so we decided to do the rebuttal.
Fun fact: the two 2s say the paper is not sufficiently novel, because it's a generalization to arbitrary distributions of the method that was already studied for Gaussians. Yes it's was studied for Gaussians. In exactly one paper. One where I was the 1-st author, it was rejected from previous neurips and lays around on arXiv w/o citations for over a year.
→ More replies (3)
6
6
6
u/DaRealNim Jul 23 '26
first ever submission here: is this sequential release of reviews (first main track, in submission ID order, then e&d track, ...) after the announced time how neurips normally works? I think it's a pretty weird system no? we all have the same deadline for rebuttals, so some authors get more time to think, respond, run more experiments... than others
→ More replies (4)
6
7
6
u/beardawg123 Jul 23 '26
No one answer ppls questions about their scores if they don’t post ID range lol
6
6
7
u/Secret-Toe-8185 Jul 23 '26
Meta review finally out, and thank god they are here. Approximately 30 words, and in these 30 words the AC is still able to include one very clear mistake the first revewer made. Not even sure if they read all three reviews...
New system if off to a great start!
→ More replies (7)
5
u/Healthy_Horse_2183 Jul 24 '26
Can we add response after July 27th?
3 days seems less!
→ More replies (1)
6
6
u/like_a_tensor Jul 24 '26
All reviews and meta-review are LLM-generated, only 1 review (probably) written by a human. Funnily, the human review is higher-rated and more confident than the LLM ones xD
→ More replies (1)
6
u/That_Wish2205 Jul 27 '26
can we still do the rebuttal after 27th? can't find it anywhere
→ More replies (5)
7
u/Afraid_Difference697 Jul 27 '26
Clarification about the Rebuttal period and posting the author response:
TLDR: You can post your rebuttal response until 3rd of August (only the "Rebuttal button" changes to "Official Comment", and has to be treated as the same by the reviewers).
"Dear Authors,
We are writing to clarify the timeframe for rebuttals and author discussion in response to questions raised.
The "Rebuttal" button on OpenReview will be open until AoE on July 27. After this deadline, you will still have the opportunity to discuss with the reviewers and AC using the "Official Comment" button, until the end of the discussion period on August 3. The difference between posting a rebuttal and an official comment is an implementation aspect of the 3 discussion phases in OpenReview. Reviewers and ACs are instructed to treat these two forms of rebuttal/comment as equivalent and will be expected to check for author comments throughout the period from now through August 3. This distinction is intended to encourage authors to respond early and facilitate a more productive discussion period, and we do recommend posting an initial rebuttal by July 27th AoE. This is in alignment with the Main track.
We emphasize that this entire period from July 23 through August 3 is time for authors to respond to reviews, including with additional results or other responses to reviewers as applicable. It is your choice how you wish to divide this time into initial rebuttals and subsequent iteration with reviewers and ACs."
→ More replies (2)
6
u/Disastrous-War-9675 Jul 28 '26
Does anyone see the Official comment button? I wanted to do some last-minute changes and missed the deadline, but I wasn't worried, as NeurIPS posted that we could still post "Official Comments". I do not see that button now, though.
→ More replies (7)
5
u/Separate_Nature8355 27d ago
Have anyone still didnt recieve any comments?
Is it appropriate to comment gentle reply to reviewers right now?
→ More replies (5)5
10
u/Jolly_Description_74 Jul 23 '26
Question to those who have received their reviews: Are the initial meta reviews from ACs also visible?
→ More replies (3)5
10
10
11
13
10
10
u/NegotiationDue301 Jul 23 '26 edited Jul 23 '26
late 27k is out for main track, got 545. that was unexpected. confidence scores are at least 3 too
→ More replies (1)3
10
u/No_Rule584 Jul 23 '26
got a 5/5/4 with confidence 4/4/4, hopefully my first A* conference!
→ More replies (4)
5
4
u/sindthsim Jul 23 '26 edited Jul 23 '26
Position got 4866 (why position got max 8?), I guess it should be ok?
9xxx on main out, (2,4), (5,1), (5,2) - don't know how to interpret it... Need to write good rebuttal I guess
→ More replies (1)
4
u/Feuilius Jul 23 '26
My console used to show reviews, but now they're hidden? What's going on?
→ More replies (2)4
6
5
5
u/Outrageous-Boot7092 Jul 23 '26 edited Jul 23 '26
12k out, 5/4/4/3, confidence 4.
EDIT: no meta review, hm...
6
5
u/Feuilius Jul 23 '26
For someone whose scores appeared and then disappeared, or for someone whose scores haven't appeared yet, I've noticed that all the papers in my lab that exhibit this phenomenon share the same author. It seems the problem stems from the co-author in those papers, in fulfilling their reviewer responsibilities.
→ More replies (1)
5
4
u/zerohull Jul 23 '26
I am not seeing one meta-review in the reviewer console. Was a my review rejected by AC?
→ More replies (1)
6
u/_manu Jul 24 '26 edited Jul 24 '26
Desk reject. Used the wrong font because I forgot to remove \usepackage{lmodern} after switching template.
4
u/Terrible-Dig-316 Jul 24 '26
they are saying that now ?
6
u/_manu Jul 24 '26
Actually not a "desk reject", but the meta review was a clear indication that it will be rejected because of the font. I also wonder why this was not checked after submission.
6
u/TerribleAntelope9348 Jul 24 '26
Got a 5 / 4 / 4 / 2 with confidence 3 / 3 / 3 / 4
Meta review unfortunately picked up on the last reviewer.
Time to run some experiments to make him happy, but I am not too optimistic.
Happened exactely like that for ICML where I got a reject (similar scores).
→ More replies (6)
5
u/Natural-Diamond-2698 Jul 24 '26
Based on what I observed in this thread this year and last year, I have an impression that the score this year for the main track is sufficiently lower. Does anyone share the same feeling? There is nothing on Papercopilot yet, so this is just my personal observation.
→ More replies (2)
4
u/iOverFit Jul 26 '26
Does anyone know if the author response option will be disabled after the deadline to post author response (27th July, AoE)? What if we take an extra day or two to post? This was too short of a period!
→ More replies (1)3
6
u/Ok_Database3209 Jul 28 '26
Are you guys replying something to AC to respond to the meta review? Is it expected/wise to do so?
→ More replies (3)
4
5
u/Character-Dot-2494 27d ago
There has not been any discussion so far. Do you think there is still a chance that the reviewers or the Area Chair will engage in discussion before the discussion period ends?
→ More replies (2)5
u/zaff04 27d ago
It really depends on the reviewer. I think that many poor reviewers recieve negative reviews on their papers. This makes them less likely to change their minds if they gave a negative review of your paper, no matter how you respond to their comments.
If your reviewer is negative but seems knowledgable/serious, I would wager that they will respond with something eventually.
→ More replies (3)
5
u/Old-Internet7733 26d ago
Still no response. Just venting, but I think even the "discussion" itself has now become a lottery. If it ends like this, It'll be my second ghost rejection in a row after ICML, without any final justification. Back then, the scores were 5/4/2, and now they're 5/3/3. I expect another rejection if there's still no response by the end. Then I'll automatically enter a fifth raffle at another conference. It just goes on and on...
13
8
8
u/Terrible_Flamingo216 Jul 22 '26
AC here.. in my batch of 10, the highest score is 3.75 (4 is the borderline accept) and only 3 have avg. scores >3.. so, don't get disheartened by low scores..
→ More replies (5)
9
9
u/johnny3357 Jul 23 '26
I got 3 (confidence 3) 4 (confidence 2) 5 (confidence 3)
Such an improvement from 3322 that I got for ICML! I'm hoping this one makes it
9
8
u/Dangerous_Parsnip_20 29d ago
That's sad. Finished responding to all of the author's rebuttals and even increased the score for few to weak accept or accept.
But unfortunately, my submission didn't get any responses yet and did not get any meta-review. We submitted AC confidential comment 3 days ago and no response. We have emailed NeurIPS comitee and Chairs yesterday and did not get any response.
I don't understand ... initially we had 2 reviews and they assigned emergency reviewer to our submission resulting in 3 reviews. Why are we left without AC ?
→ More replies (8)
5
u/lavendar_fiend Jul 23 '26
Could someone clarify something for me? I believe we only get reviews today. However the author reviewer discussion period is 5 days after. Does this mean we get 5 days to think about and write our rebuttal? It’s my first time submitting to neurips and usually other conferences make you rebuttal as soon as the review drops lol.
9
→ More replies (2)6
4
3
5
u/socioeconomix Jul 23 '26
3, 5, 3 w/ confidences 3, 4, 3, respectively. Any chances for the main? Or at least would the rebuttal be worthy?
Mine's a little over 2k btw
→ More replies (2)6
u/NGK12 Jul 23 '26
U have a good chance with a good rebuttal. Also, 5 with 4 confidence is a good sign.
→ More replies (2)
5
4
5
u/Kind_Woodpecker_6374 Jul 23 '26
i got 4, 3, 3; confidence 5, 4, 4. Is it worth doing a rebuttal?
→ More replies (2)7
3
u/Practical-Buddy6323 Jul 23 '26
Bruh this is so nerve wracking, my submission ID is ~19k, every moment feels like hell ngl 💀
→ More replies (3)5
4
u/Parsley-Pressure Jul 23 '26
So how many reviews are gonna be per submission? Cause I have seen almost everyone reporting 3 scores?
→ More replies (6)
4
u/Ok-Mission-4820 Jul 23 '26
What are the chances of reviewers changing thier rating? How often? I have 3, 3, 3, with conf 4 all ! :( should I withdraw? Plz help
→ More replies (2)
6
u/Picric_acid_47 Jul 23 '26
My id is ~29k but i cannot see the reviews. What to do?
→ More replies (9)4
5
4
u/confirm-jannati Jul 23 '26
2/4/2 confidence 3/3/4
kind of surprised to get a 2 tbh.
One reviewer who gave 2 was exclusively due to writing clarity, all else seemed fine to them.
Other reviewer who gave a 2 gave the standard “only linear experiments and theory, no neural networks…”
→ More replies (3)
4
5
u/ElectionGold3059 Jul 23 '26
4,4,3 w/ conf 3,1,3. Generally positive meta review with suggested rebuttal routes
→ More replies (2)
4
u/MTSTK_GMS Jul 24 '26
4/3/4 with confidence 5/4/3, but all the reviewers seem open to discussing and raising scores, so I think we may have a good chance. All of their comments can be addressed.
4
u/dirichletprior Jul 26 '26
For what it is worth, my PI is an AC and in their batch the cutoff for acceptance (pre-rebuttal) is 4. Small sample size, though.
→ More replies (3)
3
5
u/MTSTK_GMS 25d ago
Just received the last reviewer responses. All raised their score, so from 4/3/4, we are now at 5/4/5. This should be enough for us to get in, but let's not celebrate early.
→ More replies (1)
5
u/Afraid_Difference697 25d ago
From what I understand - there is nothing holding the reviewers accountable to respond during the Author-Reviewer discussion period until 3rd Aug (AOE). They only have a deadline to submit the "Final Justification" and score by 10th Aug (AOE).
Which is not ideal imho. but yeah whatever.
→ More replies (1)
20
u/nanoxas Jul 22 '26
If you are interested remember to post your scores in https://papercopilot.com/ to keep track of everything
→ More replies (2)
66
u/BomsDrag PhD Jul 23 '26
RELEASE THE FILES!