AC
AC on Beyond Market Intelligence: a running collection of 6 stories we have gathered and hand-picked because they are worth your time. Every post here touches on ac in some way — the news, the analysis, the deep dives, and the occasional surprise find. Acme AI is the next-generation, AI-powered spreadsheet platform built to replace Excel and redefine how analysts, data scientists, and enterprise teams work with data. New stories are added to this page as we find them, so check back if you want to keep up with what is happening around ac, or subscribe to the RSS feed to get them as soon as they are published. Browse the collection below, or head back to the homepage to see everything Beyond Market Intelligence is covering right now.
Requesting reduction in reviewer load for NeuRIPS? [D]
Requesting a reduction in reviewer load for NeuRIPS can be a challenging but necessary step, especially when balancing commitments. If you've been assigned four papers but have upcoming travel that limits your ability to provide thorough reviews, reaching out to the program chairs is a good start. It’s worth noting that in other academic communities, the typical load often falls to area chairs. For further insights on managing academic expectations, you might find our article "Graduating Without a PhD Internship" helpful.
[ECCV 2026] No modified date next to reviews [D]
In the context of ECCV 2026, it's concerning that none of the reviewers have provided recent justifications for their scores, particularly given that my rebuttal addressed all concerns. As of now, my score stands at 433, yet no reviewer has updated their feedback since May 12th or later. This pattern echoes my experience with CVPR, where the absence of justification led to an unjustified rejection despite clear responses to concerns.
How to collect evidence for LLM reviewer? [D]
In the world of academic publishing, encountering a weak rejection from a reviewer who appears to rely on LLM-generated insights can be frustrating, especially when other reviewers have provided positive feedback. This situation raises important questions about how to effectively gather evidence and address potential biases in the review process. To navigate this challenge, it’s essential to compile specific examples of the reviewer's claims, highlight discrepancies with your work, and consider reporting your findings to the Associate Chair (AC).
Need to hide rows if contain certain flights
Hi everyone! I'm seeking guidance on how to effectively manage flight data in our monthly Excel sheet. Specifically, I need to hide rows containing certain flights, like SQ, AC, or NZ, while ensuring that combinations like NZ and QF remain visible. I've experimented with filters, but they sometimes hide essential flights that I want to keep. If anyone has insights or strategies for achieving this, I would greatly appreciate your help. Thank you!
What is the AC guidance for ICML? (Or: ICML qq thread) [D]
In the context of the International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML), the role of Area Chairs (ACs) has evolved, with increased pressure to secure final justifications from reviewers and foster consensus. This shift aims to enhance the review process by ensuring that reviewers articulate their evaluations clearly. While some papers may experience quiet activity during the review phase, it's essential for ACs to encourage dialogue among reviewers.
Is the ICML 2026 final justification period still open? [R]
The final justification period for ICML 2026 is an essential phase for reviewers, allowing them to articulate their evaluations before the AC-reviewer discussion commences. Understanding whether this period remains open is crucial for fostering clear communication and ensuring constructive feedback. Reviewers are encouraged to share their insights and final thoughts during this time, as it plays a significant role in shaping the overall assessment of submissions. Engaging in this dialogue empowers both reviewers and contributors to enhance the quality of the conference.