[D] ICML Rebuttle Acknowledgement

Reddit r/MachineLearning / 4/5/2026

💬 OpinionSignals & Early TrendsIdeas & Deep AnalysisModels & Research

Key Points

  • The author reports that in an ICML rebuttal process, three out of four reviewers effectively chose “Option A” without changing their scores despite the author’s additional experiments and proofs.
  • The remaining fourth reviewer had previously assigned a score of 3 but had not replied yet, leaving the outcome unclear.
  • The post expresses frustration that reviewer requests for extensive revisions may not result in meaningful score updates, with only acknowledgements instead.
  • The author asks whether this behavior is normal for conference rebuttal workflows or an unusual case.

I've received 3 out of 4 acknowledgements, All of them basically are choosing Option A without changing their scores, because their initial scores were already positive. Meanwhile, the 4th reviewer had already given me a 3 and still hasn’t replied.

What frustrates me is that I didn’t just clarify a few points. I ran a lot of additional experiments and wrote proofs to address every request they raised. So is this really how the process is supposed to work? Reviewers can ask for as many edits, experiments, and proofs as they want, and in the end all you get is “thanks for your response” with no score update?

I’m trying to understand whether this is normal or if I just got unlucky.

submitted by /u/Charming-Fail-772
[link] [comments]