Acceptance and Author Feedback

#Accepted Papers Across Areas Our advice to the area chairs was as follows: group labels no more than 15% of your submissions “Accept”, and no more than another 20% “Lobby for Accept” or “Maybe Accept”, unless the area has fewer than 20 submissions. Area Long Short Information Extraction 24 12 Semantics 19 19 Summarization 14 … Continue reading Acceptance and Author Feedback

Advertisements

Outstanding Reviewers and Ad-hoc Reviewers

Outstanding Reviewers We thank all reviewers for spending their valuable time on reviewing NAACL paper submissions! The following are outstanding reviewers nominated by area chairs: Omri Abend Manex Agirrezabal Cem Akkaya Enrique Alfonseca Dimitrios Alikaniotis Tim Anderson Layla El Asri Michael Auli Wilker Aziz Mohit Bansal Valerio Basile Roberto Basili Beata Beigman-Klebanov Jonathan Berant Delphine Bernhard … Continue reading Outstanding Reviewers and Ad-hoc Reviewers

A First Look at the Research Track Schedule

NAACL HLT 2018 will feature: June 1: Tutorials June 2-4: Research Track June 2-3: Industry Track June 5-6: Workshops The research track will include keynotes,  long and short paper oral and poster presentations from TACL and from submissions accepted to NAACL HLT 2018, and demos. And of course there will be a NAACL business meeting … Continue reading A First Look at the Research Track Schedule

Long Paper Reviewers: Read Authors’ Responses

We have received the author responses for long paper submissions to NAACL HLT 2018. You now have through February 9th to read these responses and if necessary, adjust your reviews, at https://www.softconf.com/naacl2018/papers/. To see all the reviews and the author responses in START, you should: in the main page after you log in, click Track … Continue reading Long Paper Reviewers: Read Authors’ Responses

New review form draws widely varying opinions

As General Chair I've watched with interest the widely varying feedback we have gotten on our new review form (https://naacl2018.wordpress.com/2017/12/14/our-new-review-form/). We've tried to keep in mind that people in general might  be resistant to change,  as well as the  program chairs' motivations for designing a new form.  So we have had feedback: From experienced reviewers … Continue reading New review form draws widely varying opinions