[r/ML] [R] Best way to tackle this ICML vague response?

Summary

An author submitting to ICML received a vague reviewer response after their rebuttal, despite running new experiments to address initial weaknesses. The reviewer acknowledged that the experiments "greatly improved the paper" but stated "some details remain only partially clarified" without providing specifics. The author is now seeking advice on how to tackle this unclear feedback during the ongoing author-reviewer discussion period.

Continue Reading

Explore related coverage about community news and adjacent AI developments: [r/ML] [D] MYTHOS-INVERSION STRUCTURAL AUDIT, [r/LocalLLaMA] karpathy / autoresearch, [r/ML] [R] Agentic AI and Occupational Displacement: A Multi-Regional Task Exposure Analysis (236 occupations, 5 US metros), [r/ML] Building behavioural response models of public figures using Brain scan data (Predict their next move using psychological modelling) [P].

Related Articles

• [r/ML] [D] MYTHOS-INVERSION STRUCTURAL AUDIT

  March 29, 2026

• [r/LocalLLaMA] karpathy / autoresearch

  March 10, 2026

• [r/ML] [R] Agentic AI and Occupational Displacement: A Multi-Regional Task Exposure Analysis (236 occupations, 5 US metros)

  April 7, 2026

• [r/ML] Building behavioural response models of public figures using Brain scan data (Predict their next move using psychological modelling) [P]

  April 5, 2026