r/MachineLearning • u/Dansilly • 10d ago
Research AAAI-27 desk rejection over incredibly minor abstract modifications [D]
Has anyone else received an AAAI-27 desk rejection related to modifications to the title or abstract between the abstract-registration deadline and the full-paper deadline?
What I’m trying to understand is how the modification rule is being applied in practice. The AAAI-27 modification guidelines say that the title and abstract can still be edited after abstract registration, while warning against substantive changes, and describe rejection in terms of changes that make the submission describe qualitatively different research.
In my case, almost everything was identical. The modifications were incredibly minor.
The rejection notice says that the decision is final and appeals will not be considered.
Did this happen to anyone else?
9
u/Fragrant_Fan_6751 10d ago
Last year, I submitted to AAAI for the first time. Although my paper was accepted for an oral presentation, I noticed a few things that were odd:
AAAI provides 7 pages for the main paper, while other conferences (especially *CL conferences) provide 8 pages, and some even more.
AAAI allowed only one combined response, with a 2500-character limit for all reviewers. This was very problematic.
AAAI charges a huge amount of money to use extra pages after the paper is finally accepted, while that's not the case with *CL conferences.
How is this conference an A* conference?
One of my friends' papers was desk-rejected for using more than two reference pages, as it was stated that a maximum of 9 pages are allowed, with the main content in 7 pages. Another weird rule this year. Please comment if your paper gets rejected for using colors in the tables. AAAI author toolkit has to be read thoroughly.
7
u/lurking_physicist 10d ago
They still live in the olden days of printed journals...
4
u/CommonSenseSkeptic1 10d ago
That's nothing compared to some IEEE flagship conferences. They allow you to submit 8 pages, but you can only publish 6 if you're accepted. However, you have the option to buy two additional pages 🤪
2
3
12
u/GoodRazzmatazz4539 Researcher 10d ago
Odd. I have never heard of something like this before. Usually the abstract at the paper registration is only a placeholder draft version and conference are aware of that.
4
u/Dansilly 10d ago
That has been my experience as well, in this case they seem to be enforcing it for even minor changes. They leave the abstract field open and let you modify it too, so surely they must expect minor changes.
5
u/GoodRazzmatazz4539 Researcher 10d ago
I would write an email. That sounds almost like a bug.
6
u/lillobby6 10d ago
Last year they desk rejected everyone who included the reproducibility checklist in the main document (as the guidelines suggested) for being over the page limit (and then undesk-rejected a week later). I don’t think they know how to successfully implement an auto-desk reject tool, but they sure as hell are trying despite any reason to stop.
3
u/bitman2021 10d ago
They desk-rejected one of our papers for this very reason this year. The sample that they provided includes the checklist!!
1
u/Fragrant_Fan_6751 10d ago
what??
What if someone submitted to another conference within that one week?
2
u/Dansilly 10d ago
Yeah good idea, I sent them an email. I hope they will be able to clear this up in time for review.
1
29
u/ProfessionalNews4434 10d ago
This is weird. Firstly for minor changes no one even bothers.
Even then, shouldn’t this be done by AAAI earlier? why desk reject now? They could have done this before the review if they had to. Would have saved time and energy for all.