tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3231233230519160453.post3181067478324484120..comments2014-11-16T02:45:33.175-08:00Comments on Reinforcement Learning: On Reviewing Reinforcement Learning PapersUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3231233230519160453.post-82906814129317712612008-12-06T06:27:00.000-08:002008-12-06T06:27:00.000-08:00Keeping the field moving forward is a delicate pro...Keeping the field moving forward is a delicate process and tough reviews do have a role to play. We certainly don't want to become complacent. At ICML this year, reviewers across the board will be urged to not got bogged down in finding picky little things to complain about, but to focus on the ideas opened up by the work. We'd rather see some papers that give us really interesting things to Michael Littmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05878303953204580887noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3231233230519160453.post-29935190018063672302008-11-04T19:32:00.000-08:002008-11-04T19:32:00.000-08:00Yes, that would be good also re the discussions re...Yes, that would be good also re the discussions recently on the RL mailing list. Some of us are interested in real-world applications, some in theoretical advances and some in animal behavior... (to name only three). Reviewers can't expect (and should not require, I think) that each paper address all three (or more) -- especially given the fact that conference papers are limited to 8 pages! I am Yael Nivhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02179060177059504918noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3231233230519160453.post-30410136004622862132008-11-03T14:21:00.000-08:002008-11-03T14:21:00.000-08:00Hi Yael. Indeed, modern RL is a most amicable fiel...Hi Yael. Indeed, modern RL is a most amicable field and much of the credit for that goes to our founders, Andy Barto and Rich Sutton. This comity is really quite prevalent within the field. But reviewing by its very nature is intended to bring out our ability to discriminate between good and bad work, and so it is not surprising that reviewing is where the issue under discussion arises.<BR/> <BR/Satinder Singhhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09882622554216731854noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3231233230519160453.post-31156720602439548192008-10-31T19:51:00.000-07:002008-10-31T19:51:00.000-07:00Interesting... as a semi-outsider, it always seeme...Interesting... as a semi-outsider, it always seemed to me that RL is one of the more amicable fields. So the discrepancy between that and reviewing practices is even more surprising (at NIPS it is well known that you don't want to put your paper in the RL category lest you get those harsh reviewers). <BR/><BR/>I think of myself as a rather harsh reviewer (and many will vouch for the fact that I Yael Nivhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02179060177059504918noreply@blogger.com