Thursday, April 7

SIGIR 2011 Results

Today, the SIGIR paper acceptance/rejections were sent out. What was your result? Let me know in the comments. What did you think of the review quality? Will there be a new influx of new submissions to online journals for rejected papers?

This year there were 545 papers submitted and 108 were accepted (19.8%). Despite controversy that some papers might not receive oral presentations, all papers will have full presentations.

Instead of complaining about the reviewers of my rejected paper, I would instead like to thank the reviewers for their time and consideration, regardless of the outcome, because writing reviews takes a lot of time and effort.

My congratulations to the accepted authors. I look forward to the papers.

3 comments:

  1. Instead of complaining about the reviewers of my rejected paper, I would instead like to thank the reviewers for their time and consideration, regardless of the outcome, because writing reviews takes a lot of time and effort.

    Well, did you think that your reviewers were fair and accurate in their criticisms? That the weaknesses in your paper that they pointed out were indeed weaknesses? Because that I can accept. However, last year I had more than one reviewer who could not tell the difference between five judgments (aka assessments) of relevance, and five relevant documents. The former means that the assessing was done to five different documents. The latter means that there are five documents for which the assessment yielded a relevance=true result.

    When a reviewer can't tell that difference (and there was more than one indication that I had done one and not the other, from not only the text itself but the results as well), then I cannot thank the reviewer for their time and effort, because they put little time and effort in.

    There was someone this year who had a different, but related experience. One of their reviewers said that they really should cite paper X and use the technique described in paper X as a baseline. The reviewer faulted the paper for not doing so. In reality, the paper had both cited X and had used X as a baseline.

    Does that person get to complain?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Anonymous7:59 AM EDT

    more and more chinese people have papers accepted

    ReplyDelete