English(EN) Reviewing 4 papers for AAAI 2027 and none have code, Reject? [D]

AAAI 2027审稿人对实证论文缺乏代码表示困扰

作者 PulseAugur 编辑部 · [1 个来源] · 2026-08-25 06:34

AAAI 2027的审稿人在审阅论文时遇到了一个普遍问题：提交的论文尽管提出了实证性论断，但缺乏配套的代码或数据以供验证。尽管AAAI的指南建议提供代码，但审稿人之间就其实际执行情况以及代码发布的必要性展开了争论。一些人认为，鉴于资金或知识产权等正当理由，缺少代码不应自动导致拒稿，而且审稿人通常也没有时间审计代码。然而，无法验证实证结果会严重影响审稿人的信心。 AI

影响凸显了AI研究中可复现性和验证性面临的挑战，可能影响已发表研究成果的质量和可信度。

排序理由讨论学术会议的论文提交和审稿流程。[lever_c_demoted from research: ic=1 ai=1.0]

在 r/MachineLearning 阅读 →

AAAI 2027

AI 生成摘要 · Google Gemini · 来自 1 个来源。我们如何撰写摘要 →

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: Tool; 讨论学术会议的论文提交和审稿流程。[lever_c_demoted from research: ic=1 ai=1.0]
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, other; 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: 1 days old; Coverage has settled into its steady-state source set.

完整方法见我们的编辑标准。

报道来源 [1]

r/MachineLearning TIER_1 English(EN) · /u/SimpleObvious4048 · 2026-08-25 06:34

审阅4篇AAAI 2027论文，均无代码，是否拒绝？[D]

<div class="md"><p>I got my batch of four papers for AAAI 2027. All four papers make empirical claims, none include code, data, or anything I can actually check. Just the PDF and the checklist. AAAI-27's own rules say code/data should be provided at submission, and…

本文如何被排名

报道来源 [1]

审阅4篇AAAI 2027论文，均无代码，是否拒绝？[D]

相关实体

相关话题