As a researcher, I’m sure I’m not the only one feeling frustrated with the NeurIPS position paper review process. With multiple delays, poor communication, and a lack of transparency around the review scores, it’s hard not to feel like the whole thing has been unprofessional from the start.
I’m curious to hear from others who have received their reviews – what was your experience like? Did you find the feedback helpful, or was it as unclear as the process itself?
One of the biggest issues I’ve had is the lack of a clear rubric for what the review scores mean. Without a clear understanding of what the reviewers are looking for, it’s hard to improve or even know what to expect.
I’m not alone in my frustration – a quick glance at the comments section shows that many others are feeling the same way. So, what can we do to make this process better? How can we push for more transparency and clarity in the future?
—
*Further reading: [NeurIPS Review Process](https://nips.cc/Conferences/2022/ReviewerGuide)*