Explore >> Select a destination
|
You are here 
|
blog.geomblog.org | ||
| | | | |
greatresearch.org
|
|
| | | | | Learning how to review papers not only (obviously) makes you a better reviewer, but it can also help you as an author, since an understanding of the process can help you write your paper submissions for an audience of reviewers. If you know the criteria that a reviewer will use to judge your paper, you... | |
| | | | |
acl2017.wordpress.com
|
|
| | | | | Dear readers! As comments published in response to our last blog illustrate, the issue of arXiv and blind reviewing is controversial. The only part on which everybody seems to agree is the inadequacy of the current policy. We are rejecting papers for non-anonymised submissions where the authors genuinely forgot to remove their names, but let... | |
| | | | |
windowsontheory.org
|
|
| | | | | Michael Mitzenmacher pointsto two posts ofSuresh Venkatasubramanian on the issue of so called "double blind reviews" (i.e., anonymous submissions) in theory conferences. In short, both Michael and Suresh think they are a good idea. I agree with much of their motivations, but, based on my experience in both non-blinded (e.g., STOC/FOCS) and blinded (e.g., CRYPTO) | |
| | | | |
www.theregister.com
|
|
| | | : National Science Foundation FY 2026 budget cut by more than 60% | ||
