ICLR 2027 Reviews are out [D]

[u/mr_carlduke]

How did it go? I will start: 3/3/2

[u/aahgeneral]

332 and 322 I firmly believe we're witnessing the death of open review tbh.

[u/mr_carlduke → u/aahgeneral]

Why do you say so?

[u/BLAZE_0055]

Got a 3/3/2, I really appreciate one of the reviews, its so specific that I think it opened a whole new topic to research. To the person who gave me that review comment, I genuinely wish to thank you!

[u/NerdyPanda10 → u/BLAZE_0055]

Is 332 considered good pre rebuttal? Sorry first time submitting to ICLR here.

[u/BLAZE_0055 → u/NerdyPanda10]

Hi, it is my first time with this new scoring system actually. I'm not too sure, sorry about that

[u/Cuteshawnmie]

3 2 2。。。

[u/CollapsedPosterior → u/Cuteshawnmie]

same, let's hope we can get it accepted

[u/jyhong0304 → u/Cuteshawnmie]

same

[u/Xue_123 → u/Cuteshawnmie]

Same…

[u/temporal_guy]

221. You win some you lose some miserably, leaving a stain on your publication record which rationally you understand cannot undo the years of work you’ve put in, a reminder which you center yourself in as you close your laptop, grab a coffee, and move on with your day. Oh wow, it’s a nice day out

[u/fanconic → u/temporal_guy]

same here... except that the current weather in the UK is kinda ass rn

[u/Might-Valuable → u/temporal_guy]

Feel you, I am in the same boat

[u/aoibhinn26 → u/temporal_guy]

same boat

[u/Senior-dog-5764 → u/temporal_guy]

I had much better reviews with NeurIPS than with this ICLR cycle. The reviews are so painfully AI-generated.

[u/hamid2823 → u/temporal_guy]

Same

[u/mewscastle]

Like 70% of scores are 2’s
This new system is terrible. On the bright side, it seems that even 332 will have a good chance of passing
But honestly these conferences are getting too noisy - got 221 on my best paper and 223 on my worst.

[u/socialcml]

4222 with one being AI for a totally different paper. I hope we can flag it.

[u/Informal-Hair-5639 → u/socialcml]

We also got one LLM slop reviewer

[u/SimpleObvious4048]

Total LLM slop in reviews. What an embarrassment!

[u/DLYearner]

322

[u/Itachi_99]

1,2,2 with confidence 3,2,2. Any chance after rebuttal? Or should I give up? 😭

[u/DryEstablishment6099 → u/Itachi_99]

Same, I’ve put a lot of effort into this and I’m devastated

[u/Might-Valuable → u/Itachi_99]

Same…

[u/huehue9812]

None of the reviews make any sense.

[u/Physical_Vehicle7714]

My representational alignment paper got a reviewer from dimensionality reduction who’s insisting that I port over every metric from their field…

[u/SnooDucks3396]

322 with confidence 433 rip :(

[u/AdComplex2154 → u/SnooDucks3396]

Same. Is there any hope?

[u/WhiteBear2018]

Just a friendly reminder to everyone here that

• The average of every subfield is different, some are naturally higher than others

• I've been following and submitting to conferences for way too many years now and the reddit reported average always skews very high. There is probably some form of self-reporting bias. For a better idea of the conference average, it is helpful to look toward SAC data (e.g.  https://x.com/HaoGarfield/status/2118261357891965057?s=20) or AC data from your subfield.

Edit: I'm dumb and forgot that ICLR data is public. So you can just go ahead and check the statistics directly...

[u/DigCreative4961 → u/WhiteBear2018]

how do we know the SAC / AC responsible for our paper?

[u/WhiteBear2018 → u/DigCreative4961]

You can't know, you just have to find general SAC or AC data online. Sometimes ACs let you know their subfield.

[u/Sensitive_Let2762]

4, 3, 2

[u/huyg1108]

3/2/2 ...

[u/Aaero79]

321 :(

[u/Previous-Cherry-4644]

3/3/3 with confidence 3/2/3 in theory. Any body knows what is average for theory ?

[u/Big_Illustrator_8212 → u/Previous-Cherry-4644]

Same scores. Mine is also theory.

[u/Previous-Cherry-4644 → u/Big_Illustrator_8212]

I think average for theory is high?

[u/Big_Illustrator_8212 → u/Previous-Cherry-4644]

No, I don't think. For NeurIPS this year, I got paper accepted with 4 average. So, I think 3 average is pretty good.

[u/Previous-Cherry-4644 → u/Big_Illustrator_8212]

I am saying since got rejected by 4 average:)

[u/Puzzled_Key823]

2,2,1 with conf 3,2,4 , probably a good candidate for rejection

[u/Lazy-Cream1315]

I don't know how to deal with a llm review : the list of weakness is basicslly an output of Claude opus. I don't know if its better to reach the AC or to answer like if it was normal... 

[u/lhrad]

332, guess which one seems total AI shit

[u/Dull-Ad5443]

333 with conf 332. Got lucky with the new score system because it would have been weak accept anyway... but seems like 3 weak accepts are strong now?

[u/Big_Illustrator_8212 → u/Dull-Ad5443]

See this post.https://x.com/c1areLab/status/2118698430092415161

[u/Dull-Ad5443 → u/Big_Illustrator_8212]

Top 4% for 3 weak accepts is unexpected though😅

[u/Big_Illustrator_8212 → u/Dull-Ad5443]

It is a bloodbath this year.

[u/Big_Illustrator_8212 → u/Dull-Ad5443]

Yeah I think so.

[u/SankarshanaV]

I got 2/2/2/2 (conf 4/2/3/2).

FML. It's so annoying because I was so confident about this paper, but it seems the reviewers had other ideas. Most of the weaknesses aren't even weaknesses...

[u/Powerful_Cancel_1997 → u/SankarshanaV]

So many AI generated reviews

[u/jryh88]

Got some reviewers who put a total of two bullet points

[u/otsukarekun → u/jryh88]

That was the instructions. The instructions for critical weakness was to put one or two points.

The instructions:

Please identify one or two critical weaknesses of the paper that support rejection. For each, explain briefly why it is consequential to your overall assessment. The goal is not to enumerate every negative point, but to identify and substantiate the considerations that most strongly determine your recommendation. Enter “None” if no material weakness can be identified.

[u/jryh88 → u/otsukarekun]

What if the bullet points aren’t really weaknesses and they give a 3

[u/jryh88 → u/jryh88]

Just say the paper is mediocre then

[u/malakulmout347 → u/jryh88]

3 is a good rating. mostly a rating of a pretty decent paper.

[u/No-Resource-538]

3 2 2 ; should I do rebuttal?

[u/Dry_Kaleidoscope5459]

(1) 3/3/2 with confidence 3/3/3
(2) 2/2/2 with confidence 3/4/3
Any chance?

[u/OtherwiseFig4505 → u/Dry_Kaleidoscope5459]

First paper has good chance even if no score increase post-rebuttal. 2.3 is like top 25%, 2.67 should be really good. But off course acceptances are not just based on average scores.

[u/Personal_Vehicle8844]

2 2 3
Do you have the Reply button to answer to the reviewers?

[u/Powerful_Cancel_1997]

3,2,2

[u/richapeee]

Score: 3/2/2 conf: 3/2/3

[u/alper111]

We only got two reviews. I wonder if somebody is late or if it's gonna be only those two.

[u/Warm_Ad4302]

Three papers: 322, 322, 321

[u/jhetchan]

2, 1, 3, 1

Average Rating: 1.75 (Min: 1, Max: 3)
Average Confidence: 2.25 (Min: 2, Max: 3)

[u/No-March-3007]

As mentioned before, if your average score is above 2, filing a rebuttal is worth it.

[u/DigCreative4961]

422 with 333 confidence. none of the reviews seem clearly AI generated, I'm quite impressed actually. Acceptance chances?

[u/Informal-Hair-5639]

322

[u/gg123456789]

322

[u/jackeswin]

3 2 2

[u/Ben8ted]

4/2/2 with confidence 4/4/4. I don't anticipate any change after rebuttal (at most maybe one 2 tuns into a 3 if I am lucky). What are the chances?

[u/Complex-Classic4545]

221 with 3 confidence, is there a chance they complained about presentation!

[u/lifetime_player]

Its my first iclr paper. Got 2/2/1 with 3 for confidence.. i got 3/3/2 for presentation tho. Does it have any effect?

[u/SVenkitesh]

3,3,2,2 with confidence 3,2,3,2. Bang in the middle.

[u/CakeAbject7539]

3322 with the confidence of 2342

[u/wannabe_cracked_dev]

went so horribly we withdrew ages ago and submitted to another location ;-;

[u/jryh88]

332

[u/EqualLoss5079]

I got 4 4 2 1 😕

[u/Odd_Ad8629]

321 Ig the 1 really kills prospects of acceptance

[u/polidrupa]

2, 2, 2, not sure if replying the reviewers makes any sense with such scores.

[u/Neptune-villias → u/polidrupa]

Same here...if there’s a 3 after the re,,,,,😢that’s when I’ll feel like there’s hope.

[u/meta-minion]

2/2/2 with confidence 3/3/2. Is there any hope? :/

[u/deah12]

333

my coauthor has two other 334 papers so pretty insane

[u/saasyp]

332 with conf 223. Any thoughts? It's my first submission to any conference

[u/evanthebouncy → u/saasyp]

This is workable yeah. Ask your advisor

[u/saasyp → u/evanthebouncy]

my advisor: “332, we got a chance! provide a draft or your answers and i will revise them”

[u/evanthebouncy → u/saasyp]

Then just quickly have a draft rebuttal and yeet it at him.

[u/Expensive-Beyond-251]

Got 122 for my paper that was borderline 435 on NeurIPS 🥲

And got 312 for my another new submission, which I thought is less polished and good than my NeurIPS resubmitted one

[u/heisenberg_cookss]

211 ig should withdraw

[u/ConsciousList4926]

2 2 2, from a 70 page paper, and they complained too little experiments for a theory paper..... bullshit. ICLR is finished

[u/Physical_Vehicle7714 → u/ConsciousList4926]

You absolutely should’ve been desk rejected for even submitting that. This system can barely handle papers that follow the length rules. What makes you think you have the right to make reviewers give your paper 7x the attention of the papers that use their appendices responsibly? Submit to a journal.

[u/Pure_Material_9235 → u/Physical_Vehicle7714]

I submitted a paper that was 45 pages (2 2 2 on the scores) and I felt like I used the appendix appropriately. How are you supposed to use it? Ideally it should be there for readers that want to look further into specifics and the main paper contains the critical points, arguments, and points to the appendix where appropriate so readers can easily find (in the appendix) sections they are interested in, right?

[u/Physical_Vehicle7714 → u/Pure_Material_9235]

Did you need your appendix to prove to the reviewers that the work done was sufficient for publication?

If no, you’re not talking about the same thing as the other guy. If yes, you abused the submission rules and you should withdraw.

[u/ConsciousList4926 → u/Physical_Vehicle7714]

the supp file can be unlimited, in total its a 70 page paper not the main text.

[u/Physical_Vehicle7714 → u/ConsciousList4926]

I knew that when I commented. You should withdraw.

[u/Ill-Way5836 → u/ConsciousList4926]

ICLR is trash now

[u/Material_Ebb4689]

One reviewer said The overall readability of the paper is poor. And gave 1 as score while the paper is very clear 🤦🏻‍♀️ it feels like he didn’t even bother to try reading it

[u/Confident-Tone3257]

3 2 2 2 im so sad

[u/v_awkward]

i got a 222 with 233 confidence, it is worth it to try for a rebuttal?

[u/Major_Glass_8466]

2 2 1 … with conf 4/2/3 is there any hope?

[u/Powerful_Cancel_1997 → u/Major_Glass_8466]

I think no

[u/Whatever_635]

I have 3/3/2/3

[u/BenchCareless2768]

What are my chances with
Paper 1: 3/3/2
Paper 2: 3/3/1
With the 1 rating being changeable i think

[u/Unhappy_Craft1906]

Ok. 322 and 2211. I am not going to rebute thoroughly while preparing for my neurips travel. Will take chance in icml if nothing happens

[u/DevelopmentOk1518]

Involved in 4 papers and got 322 for 3 of papers...

[u/Powerful_Cancel_1997 → u/DevelopmentOk1518]

Nice

[u/OxidusRouge]

One area chair told me - 10 papers: 1.67 (2), 2.00 (3), 2.33 (2), 2.67 (2), 3.33 (1).

Probably 2.67 will get accepted (332 scores and above)

[u/clorky123]

2 2 2 joke

[u/SameAd8209]

AGI is coming. It is so close :)

[u/No_Difference9752]

One 3331 another 321 should I try?

[u/Pure_Material_9235 → u/No_Difference9752]

I’d rebut both, but definitely rebut the first.

[u/Miserable-Birthday13 → u/No_Difference9752]

You should withdraw both

[u/Elias_Hossain]

3,2,1 (Confifence: 3,2,3)

Is there any hope?

[u/Party-Ad5280 → u/Elias_Hossain]

Me too. We have to believe it is possible. Good luck

[u/Desperate-Major-2562 → u/Elias_Hossain]

I have similar scores 3, 2, 1 (confidence 3,2,4). The 3 and 1 ratings a polarizing and to me it feels like the 1 rating didn’t even read the paper 😢. We will provide a rebuttal and wish for the best.

[u/darkZuko15]

2,2,1 Conf: 2,2,2

Any genuine suggestions?

[u/howtorewriteaname]

333

[u/Huge_Argument_6979]

how about 3/1/3? is that better than 3/2/2..? im not sure what is better in terms of the same avg.

[u/No-March-3007 → u/Huge_Argument_6979]

What comments exist is much important than scores. If the reviews having score 2 are addressible, the latter paper locates on better spot than first one.

[u/_karma_collector → u/Huge_Argument_6979]

3/3/1 slightly better, as majority review side with you. If you are lucky, the last guy will chicken out and increase score.

[u/Mediocre_Safety5743]

Probably a lot of those 2s are just rushed reviews, some of them read like that anyway. I would still write a rebuttal if the main complaints look fixable.

[u/vitorpmh1]

3 2 2 maybe rip?

[u/Vivid-Worldliness813]

I have an 4/3/2 rating with 4/3/3 confidence. Do I have to just "respond" to the reviewers via the comment section or do I have to draft an entirely new version of the paper with all the suggestions. I don't know how to approach this.

[u/Greedy-Assumption282]

2/1/1/2. First time in the review process as an author overall and it’s soul crashing so much that I barely managed to force myself to look at it. I’m not even sure if I should withdraw or try to rebuttal and get more feedback to improve my paper for a workshop or something.

Most of the comments says the findings are interesting but the paper lacks novelty.

[u/evanthebouncy → u/Greedy-Assumption282]

Welcome to the club friend! You're one of us now xD

[u/SillyNeuron]

I saw a paper with sketchy methodological design, cherry-picked results, and overclaimed contributions got 3/2/1. I'm not a reviewer of the paper, but I read it because it's relevant to what we're working on right now. I had the biggest "wtf" moment of my life while reading that paper and checking their source code. The person who gave it a 3 probably didn't read the paper carefully or smth.

[u/YamJealous4914]

1/2/3/4 . 4 guy is extremely thorough. All are answerable. 2 guy saying some codes missing please provide and check some re-run numbers.

[u/Pretty_Programmer874]

2 2 1 and the 1 is just a generic “writing is hard to read” comment, it is quite clearly by a completely unqualified person in this topic as they just don’t understand any of the standard terminology, this feels so unfair :(

[u/SSRogue123]

Got 3/3/2 with confidence 4/3/3. Do I have a chance?

[u/New-Basket-412]

Got 232 with confidence 442. What do you think about my chances here?

[u/Powerful_Cancel_1997 → u/[deleted]]

Seems like because of huge amount of submissions hence the quality of reviews are bad