3 ms·
As pointed out in the comments, conferences have physical limits on the number of presenters (even in poster sessions), so the number of accepted papers at top
by macleginn 1y ago
As pointed out in the comments, conferences have physical limits on the number of presenters (even in poster sessions), so the number of accepted papers at top conferences will likely stop growing at some point. (Perhaps it should have been capped already.) This will probably lead to new conferences appearing to satisfy the "demand", but more conferences of varying quality is probably better than reviewing at top conferences being random at best.
- whiplash451 1y agoCreating a new, first-grade conference from scratch is hard. NeuriPS, CVPR and ICML are solid brands that took decades to build.
- bonoboTP 1y agoICLR managed it quite fast.
- lumost 1y agoIm on an academic foray to an R1 right now. One of the big items the PIs are drilling is the one paper per year mantra. Many papers today are representing what would have happened via open source repos in yesteryear. Meaning that there is a lot of work which is useful to someone and having peer reviewed benchmarks etc. is useful to understand whether those people should care. The weakness is that some of this work is the equivalent of shovelware.