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	8
Tagging, Chunking, Syntax and Parsing	14	7
Generation	14	6
Machine Learning for NLP	14	6
Machine Translation	13	8
Vision, Robotics and Other Grounding	10	10
NLP Applications	10	8
Social Media and Computational Social Science	10	5
Sentiment Analysis	9	5
Phonology, Morphology, and Word Segmentation	9	3
Discourse and Pragmatics	8	8
Text Mining	8	6
Question Answering	7	7
Dialogue and Interactive Systems	7	2
Cognitive Modeling and Psycholinguistics	7	1
Speech	6	3
Theory and Formalisms	4	1

Good Papers Appreciated Reviews More

This year we asked authors to rate the reviews on their quality and whether the reviews were helpful. The following are the results which made us smile:-)

Paper Review Overall Score	# Author Responses	Review Quality	Review Helpfulness
[1, 2)	6	3.5	3.0
[2, 3)	46	3.1	2.5
[3, 4)	98	3.4	2.9
[4, 5)	95	3.9	3.2
[5, 6]	6	4.2	3.5

To what extent can reviewers identify authors?

6.2% reviews believed they knew who the authors were because the reviewers had seen the papers as preprints or the papers or supplementary materials revealed author identities.
12.3% reviews could guess author identities, but the submissions themselves didn’t communicate who the authors were.
The rest 81.5% reviews had no idea about who the authors were.

Advertisement