Comments on: Avoidable Failures of Peer Review http://blog.regehr.org/archives/675 Tue, 21 May 2013 23:36:47 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5.1 By: Colin Dixon http://blog.regehr.org/archives/675/comment-page-1#comment-3955 Colin Dixon Wed, 08 Feb 2012 05:47:52 +0000 http://blog.regehr.org/?p=675#comment-3955 Simply accepting more papers neglects the fact that the scarcity of top conference slots per year is not artificial. It serves to allow researchers to keep up-to-date without needing to read an unending number of papers. Today, a broad researcher in computer systems might focus on ~4 conferences which is something like 120 papers per year. Quadrupling that would not make things easier.

]]> By: Suresh http://blog.regehr.org/archives/675/comment-page-1#comment-3880 Suresh Tue, 31 Jan 2012 04:00:57 +0000 http://blog.regehr.org/?p=675#comment-3880 one problem with ‘whiteballs’ is that as a PC member, it will be a lot harder to explain why someone’s paper gets rejected if they confront you ;) .

More generally, I think increasing the acceptance rate is the one thing that makes judgements a lot easier, because you’re not comparing apples to oranges as you inevitably have to do. The problem is that this goes directly against the ‘conference as status symbol’ issue.

]]>