一名一年级博士生正在就是否因分数平平而从ACL ARR审稿周期撤回论文寻求建议。该生提交的可解释性论文获得了2.5/3、3/4和2.5/4的分数，他们认为这可能不足以被接受。他们正在考虑修改论文并将其提交给BlackboxNLP研讨会。 AI
排序理由 用户正在就个人学术发表决定寻求建议，而不是报道新事件或发现。
AI 生成摘要 · Google Gemini · 来自 1 个来源。 我们如何撰写摘要 →
博士生就ACL ARR论文撤稿寻求建议
本文如何被排名
- Signal score
- 0 / 100
- Composite score across the factors below. Higher = stronger signal that this story matters right now.
- Newsworthiness bucket
- Commentary
- 用户正在就个人学术发表决定寻求建议，而不是报道新事件或发现。
- Source corroboration
- Single-source cluster
- Only one publisher covered this so far. Single-source stories can still rank when the publisher is high-authority, but they lack cross-source corroboration.
- Topics
- paper
- Editorial topic classification. Feeds into how the story surfaces on /topic/<slug> hub pages and into the per-entity coverage mix.
- AI-industry relevance
- High
- Clearly on-topic for AI-industry coverage.
- Story freshness
- 45 days old
- Aged out of breaking-news scoring windows; ranking reflects the durable signal from the full source set.
完整方法见我们的编辑标准。
报道来源 [1]
-
退出ACL ARR并重新提交到研讨会？[D]
<!-- SC_OFF --><div class="md"><p>Hey guys,</p> <p>I received mediocre scores for my EMNLP paper during the May ACL ARR cycle: 2.5/3, 3/4, 2.5/4. The paper is in the Interpretability track. The reviewers had no larger issue with the methodology or the paper in general, but it see…