8 citations · 35 across the 11 of their papers we have counts for
9 papers · 1 filter
A Large Scale Randomized Controlled Trial on Herding in Peer-Review Discussions
Ivan Stelmakh, Charvi Rastogi, Nihar B. Shah +2
Peer review is the backbone of academia and humans constitute a cornerstone of this process, being responsible for reviewing papers and making the final acceptance/rejection decisi…
A Novice-Reviewer Experiment to Address Scarcity of Qualified Reviewers in Large Conferences
Ivan Stelmakh, Nihar B. Shah, Aarti Singh +1
Conference peer review constitutes a human-computation process whose importance cannot be overstated: not only it identifies the best submissions for acceptance, but, ultimately, i…
Prior and Prejudice: The Novice Reviewers' Bias against Resubmissions in Conference Peer Review
Ivan Stelmakh, Nihar B. Shah, Aarti Singh +1
Modern machine learning and computer science conferences are experiencing a surge in the number of submissions that challenges the quality of peer review as the number of competent…
On the Potential of Lexico-logical Alignments for Semantic Parsing to SQL Queries
Tianze Shi, Chen Zhao, Jordan Boyd-Graber +2
Large-scale semantic parsing datasets annotated with logical forms have enabled major advances in supervised approaches. But can richer supervision help even more? To explore the u…
Active Imitation Learning from Multiple Non-Deterministic Teachers: Formulation, Challenges, and Algorithms
Khanh Nguyen, Hal Daumé
We formulate the problem of learning to imitate multiple, non-deterministic teachers with minimal interaction cost. Rather than learning a specific policy as in standard imitation…
Language (Technology) is Power: A Critical Survey of "Bias" in NLP
Su Lin Blodgett, Solon Barocas, Hal Daumé +1
We survey 146 papers analyzing "bias" in NLP systems, finding that their motivations are often vague, inconsistent, and lacking in normative reasoning, despite the fact that analyz…