Presentation of material at an academic talk is acceptable. What should I do?
Q. I wish to claim a dataset contribution in my paper and release the dataset, but the data is not ready for release at submission time. Program Co-chairsKevin Leyton-Brown (University of British Columbia, Canada)Mausam (Indian Institute of Technology Delhi, India), General ChairQiang Yang (Hong Kong University of Science and Technology and WeBank, Hongkong), Associate Program Co-chairsYan Liu (University of Southern California, USA)Gabriele Rger (Universitt Basel, Switzerland), Associate Conference Co-chairs for Virtual OperationsWeike Pan (Shenzhen University, China)Lingfei Wu (IBM Research, USA), Workflow Co-chairsDinesh Raghu (IBM Research Delhi, India)Guangneng Hu (Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, Hongkong)Hedayat Zarkoob (University of British Columbia, Canada), Reproducibility ChairOdd Erik Gundersen (Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Norway), This site is protected by copyright and trademark laws under US and International law. Fonts: Embed ALL fonts in your PDF file. NO, you can make minor modifications to the dataset until the camera-ready deadline. Make sure the supplementary material does not reveal author identity. A. A. Any paper that claims a dataset contribution will need to provide a URL for the dataset when submitting the camera ready. This option adds value; ones RA-L submission has the opportunity to be presented at IROS. Please see the full policy on Submission/Paper Modification Guidelines. Authors should think carefully about which track is most appropriate for their work. Reviewers are exposed to this work and the attention it receives can bias their judgment - if so many people on social media are excited, mustn't it be good? How will the submitted code be used for decision-making? A. Q. In such a case your paper must stand on its other (e.g. We intend to close the submission system exactly at the deadline; however, in the event of system outages or other exceptional circumstances, last minute changes may be announced on Twitter by both @k_leyton_brown and @mishumausam using the #AAAI2021 hashtag. Only the program chairs, the technical chairs, and the reviewers and area chairs assigned to your paper will have access to your code. As stated in the instructions above, the authors are not allowed to go to the press with their submission prior to the end of the review process, or to advertise their work orwork with substantial overlap to the CVPR submission (such as an arXiv paper) on social media. A violation occurs only when authors are proactively doing so. Additionally, this year, we encourage authors to (optionally) write a statement about the potential ethical impact of their work, including its broad societal implications, both positive and negative. Is that a violation? Average score means we sum scores of all reviews that gave a numerical score, potentially including meta-reviews, and divide by number of such reviews (i.e., not confidence-weighting). The recommended course should be to not use the dataset, and (if necessary) explain that this may affect certain comparisons with prior art. if there are grave misunderstandings on the part of a referee. We understand that many of our authors work with highly sensitive datasets, and are not asking for private data submission. In particular, reviewers will assess novelty of the AI problem formulation studied; the papers engagement with previous literature on the application problem (whether in the AI literature or elsewhere); both novelty of and justification for the proposed solution; quality of evaluation; facilitation of follow-up work; and overall scope and promise for social impact. Author response after Phase 2, only for papers that are not rejected in Phase 1. For example, do I need to include a citation to Python, since I used Python to write my code? Q. One can upload or re-upload their video attachment no later than on March 9, 2021 ( 23:59 PST). If there is negative societal impact, the discussion should also include any mitigation strategies (e.g., gated release of models, providing defenses in addition to attacks, mechanisms for monitoring misuse, mechanisms to monitor how a system learns from feedback over time, improving the efficiency and accessibility of CV models). Certain assumptions need to be made, which may not be able to fully reflect all nuisances in the real world. version of the submission that is put up without any form of direct peer-review is NOT considered prior art and should NOT be cited in the submission. It is the primary author's responsibility to ensure that all authors on their paper have registered on CMT3 and provide their conflict information. Per the motion passed at CVPR 2021, this is a loophole to the original press ban principles. Talk to the media about their work as "in submission to CVPR". The official CVPR style may be but does not have to be used. Note that there is no formal requirement to include a discussion of potential negative societal impact, but reviewers will be asked to favorably consider the inclusion of a meaningful discussion of this issue. A. Authors have the option to purchase up to two additional pages to include additional technical content in the published proceedings at a cost of $275 per page. The practice of keeping all information confidential during the review is part of the standard communication to all reviewers. Q. Confidential comments: Authors have the possibility to submit confidential comments to the area chair (meta reviewer) in a text box on the rebuttal form. This statement may be written within and as part of the two extra pages designated for references, and will not be counted in the seven pages of technical content.
Q. I would like to revise my code/add code during author feedback. The selection of the best presentation Papers will be made on the basis of the review process results and of an ad-hoc presentation by the selected runners-up.
), Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence, AAAI-21 Student Technical Volunteer Program, This authors guide for choosing the best keywords, AAAI Publications Ethics and Malpractice Statement. A. To avoid undeclared conflicts, the author list is considered to be final after the submission deadline and no changes are allowed for accepted papers. YES, we expect submitted code to be published with the rest of the supplementary. Additional pages containing only cited references are allowed.
Q. Q. Q. I wish to claim a dataset contribution in my paper and release the dataset, but the data may/will not be ready for release at the camera-ready deadline. In a theoretical paper on algorithmic fairness, the paper might caution against overreliance on mathematical metrics for quantifying fairness and examples of ways this can go wrong. You will not be able to submit any paper without entering this information. These published, archival versions of the papers will be made available in the AAAI Digital Library. A. Authors can include one or more of the following: (1) a technical appendix (PDF) containing additional details in support of the arguments advanced by the main paper (e.g., proofs, experimental results, descriptions of datasets); (2) a multimedia appendix (ZIP) including images, audio files, video demonstrations, etc., in support of the paper; (3) code & data (ZIP) to aid the reviewers in assessing the reproducibility of the papers claims; and (4) three previous submission documents (PDFs) that include the set of previous reviews, an author response to these reviews, and the version of the paper to which these reviews apply. A. Social Media Ban: Per the motion passed in the CVPR 2021 PAMI-TC meeting, authors should NOT use social media to promote their paper submissions to CVPR during the review period. A. Note that in many cases alternative datasets exist. A. Plagiarism: Plagiarism consists of appropriating the words or results of another, without credit. Dual/Double Submissions: The goals of CVPR are to publish exciting new work for the first time and to avoid duplicating the effort of reviewers. The conference scope includes machine learning (deep learning, statistical learning, etc), natural language processing, computer vision, data mining, multiagent systems, knowledge representation, human-in-the-loop AI, search, planning, reasoning, robotics and perception, and ethics. We will instruct reviewers and area chairs to keep the code submissions confidential (just like the paper submissions), and delete all code submissions from their machine at the end of the review cycle. International Conference on Automation, Robotics and Applications (ICARA 2023), All right reserved. AAAI-21 will not consider any paper that, at the time of submission, is under review for or has already been published or accepted for publication in any archival venue such as a journal or a conference. Can I provide an anonymous link to the dataset? In recent conference cycles, some authors were found posting about their submissions on Twitter or other social media, even including the title or a snapshot of the paper. All references in the submitted paper must appear in the final version, unless superseded. Papers are expected to cite those refereed publications most relevant to their content, but authors are excused for not knowing about all non-refereed work (e.g, appearing on ArXiv). A second track of the conference will focus on AI for Social Impact. Template Download:
We recommend holding off on a submission. The submitted code will be used as additional evidence provided by the authors to add more credibility to their results. A. You can say that the code will be made publicly available. This text box should only be used for this specific purpose all other points, including questions about limitations, must be addressed in the rebuttal PDF. Use good judgement, just like you would for citations of previous scientific work. Authors should consider adding hi-res images as supplementary material (see supplementary material guidelines). Groups with large followings and the resources to mount visible social media promotions can receive significant attention for work that is under review. To reduce confusion, whenever citing papers that initially appeared on arXiv, the authors should check whether those papers had subsequently been published in a peer-reviewed venue, and to cite those versions accordingly. A. Submissions to GitHub and similar repositories cannot be rejected and are accepted by default before any "review" that can take place on such platforms. Authors will submit PDF preprints of accepted papers (near camera-ready) for inclusion in the electronic materials made available to conference attendees by December 15, 2020. It is NOT intended to add new contributions (theorems, algorithms, experiments) that were absent in the original submission and NOT specifically requested by the reviewers. On the other hand, if the paper develops a generic algorithm for optimizing neural networks, authors do not need to mention that this could enable people to train models that generate deep-fakes faster. Do all authors need to fill this out? To that end, authors need to ensure following conditions: (1) The image and video material is too large to include in the 100MB file size limit. It is sufficient at submission time to state that you obtained IRB approval (either in the paper or in the supplemental material). NO, technologies often have two sides.
Supplementary material deadline is one week after paper submission deadline. Can I update my papers information (e.g., title, abstract, author list, subject areas, questionnaire) after the paper registration deadline? The cover letter should summarize the main reasons for rejection and describe the changes (if any) the authros have made or a rebuttal of the original rejection. Instead present your results referring to the method proposed in your paper and draw conclusions based on the experimental comparison to other results. A paper may be rejected if the program chairs feel that the authors have attempted to let potential reviewers know who wrote the paper. Does my paper need to have a dedicated limitations section? Link or repository access should not reveal author or reviewer identity. Every paper will be allocated two reviewers. Reviewers and area chairs will be asked to favorably consider the inclusion of a meaningful discussion of potential negative societal impact. (2) Avoid citing previous, unpublished work that would surely identify the authors (e.g., a previous technical report or PhD thesis which substantially overlaps with the current submission); such citations may be added to the camera ready. Topics include, but are not limited to, efforts to further scientific understanding of the virus and its impact on society; models for spread of the pandemic; approaches leveraging AI to help contain the virus; methods for improving treatment of COVID-19 patients; and mitigations for economic, social or technical challenges arising from the pandemic. Q. We thank authors in advance for their willingness to contribute to this important task. This includes responses where the margins and formatting are deemed to have been significantly altered from those specified by the style guide. As with all summary rejects, such decisions are final. Q.
Authors will be required to transfer copyright of their paper to AAAI. This year the intent is to increase awareness in the community and acquire experience for authors, reviewers, and organisers as well as to provide a basis for a discussion on how to handle such questions in future conferences. By our definition, the social media silence period starts four weeks before the paper submission deadline, until the final paper decision notifications are sent to authors. Science depends on this trust both for funding and for its independence. You can report to me conferences matched with the wrong call for papers (while the right one exists on WikiCFP). Authors may want to consider whether their potential AAAI submission is more appropriate for one of these other venues. No. Only PDF files are required at the time of submission for review; you will additionally need to submit paper source files if your paper is accepted for publication. A. Final decisions will be made based only on the opinions of AAAI reviewers, SPC members and area chairs. Q. The program chairs reserve the right to reject papers with grave ethical issues, but expect this to occur only in exceptional circumstances.
If there are other reasons for not being able to submit code, you are encouraged to explain this in your submission, such as in the supplemental material. Potential reviewers will be vetted based on their research experience, and depending on this experience may be selected as program committee or senior program committee members. A 1-minute video (up to 10 MB) can be added to supplement your paper. The policy applies only to those papers that claim the release of a dataset as one of its core scientific contributions. Our timeline expects that papers will go to reviewers about December 16, 2021, and reviews should be returned on or before January 14, 2022.
Please submit papers via the customary Paper Plaza process. Does the data contribution policy mean that any dataset that I use must be public? Confidentiality: The review process of CVPR is confidential. Can I promote my paper in the press or on social media? Reviewers may use this material to verify the claims made in the main paper and to assess the reproducibility of the work. No. Failing to cite an arXiv paper or failing to beat its performance SHOULD NOT be sole grounds for rejection. Papers must be in trouble-free, high-resolution PDF format, formatted for US Letter (8.5 x 11) paper, using Type 1 or TrueType fonts. At any time, you can update this information by clicking on your name in the upper-right and selecting User information under CVPR2022. A. Less experienced researchers as determined from their publication records will only be asked to review in Phase 2. A single author feedback phase will give authors of papers from Phase 2 an opportunity to comment on all reviews (from both phases), running from November 3-5. Every submission requires both an abstract submission and a corresponding paper submission. Including information on the licensing terms / copyright terms shows that authors carefully considered this.
The question from the reviewers perspective is whether the authors have a full understanding of the proposed technology, such that they know under what condition it works, and under what conditions it would not work.