[ICML 2026] Extending the deadline for reviewer final justifications while not extending for Author-AC comments was a huge mistake [D]

Reddit r/MachineLearning / 4/13/2026

💬 OpinionSignals & Early TrendsIdeas & Deep AnalysisTools & Practical Usage

共有:

Key Points

The post argues that ICML 2026’s policy of extending reviewer final-justification deadlines while not extending the author window to contact their ACs was a “huge mistake.”
It describes a situation where a reviewer raised concerns about the experimental setup, evaluation reliability, and fairness of comparisons in the final justification despite not mentioning them earlier.
The author suspects the later remarks may be attempts to rationalize keeping a low score (e.g., “weak accept”) rather than addressing issues discussed during the initial review or rebuttal.
The post concludes that this process could significantly disadvantage the paper even if earlier reviews were generally leaning acceptance.

Just as the title says, I believe the decision to extend the deadline for reviewers to post their final justifications while not allowing authors to contact their ACs was a big misstep. I have a reviewer who, in their final justification is questioning the reliability of experimental setup and evaluation, as was as the fairness of comparison, issues that were never brought up during the initial review or their response to our rebuttal. It seems as though they were looking for reasons to justify not wanting to move their score from weak accept. It now feels like, despite having otherwise strong reviews that are leaning accept, this review might tank the paper.

submitted by /u/undesirable_12
[link] [comments]