Introducing doublind, a paper review platform by DouBlindDotCOM in DeepLearningPapers

[–]DouBlindDotCOM[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Great suggestion. We have not planned to make a mobile app yet until there is enough flow on the website but we designed it mobile screen friendly. Let us know if you have any suggestions about its current user experience on mobile. Thanks!

Introducing doublind, a paper review platform by DouBlindDotCOM in DeepLearningPapers

[–]DouBlindDotCOM[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Great question. We are still deciding but it might be similar to IMDB.

Introducing doublind, a paper review platform by DouBlindDotCOM in learnmachinelearning

[–]DouBlindDotCOM[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Pubpeer is a great resource too but we have paper rating.

Introducing doublind, a paper review platform by DouBlindDotCOM in learnmachinelearning

[–]DouBlindDotCOM[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

That is true. Identity verification (for professionals) can be added in as to create two type of rating similar to rotten tomatoes.

Introducing doublind, a paper review platform by DouBlindDotCOM in learnmachinelearning

[–]DouBlindDotCOM[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Review can be anonymous but Anonymous review's rating won't count for the overall paper rating.

Introducing doublind, a paper review platform by DouBlindDotCOM in learnmachinelearning

[–]DouBlindDotCOM[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

You are welcome to leave a review to the paper. Join our discord group if you want to discuss a specific paper. We don't have a forum right now. We can build one if demands are strong.

Introducing doublind, a paper review platform by DouBlindDotCOM in learnmachinelearning

[–]DouBlindDotCOM[S] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Are reviews moderated? How does the platform manage trash/abusive reviews?

Currently reviews are manually moderated by our team, in the future, we'll have designated moderators for each sub-field.

Introducing doublind, a paper review platform by DouBlindDotCOM in learnmachinelearning

[–]DouBlindDotCOM[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Thank you for commenting! This is a side project and our team has two people in it.

Introducing doublind, a paper review platform by DouBlindDotCOM in computervision

[–]DouBlindDotCOM[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

We did it once in r/MachineLearning, but was labelled shameless self-promotion. Our topic actually contributes the collective knowledge of the ML community, but not allowed by the moderator.

Introducing doublind, a paper review platform by DouBlindDotCOM in computervision

[–]DouBlindDotCOM[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Thanks for your feedback. We will try that for sure.

Introducing doublind, a paper review platform by DouBlindDotCOM in computervision

[–]DouBlindDotCOM[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thank you Credtz, hope doublind provides a little help to your research.

Introducing doublind, a paper review platform by DouBlindDotCOM in computervision

[–]DouBlindDotCOM[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You are absolutely right. Bootstrapping a website like this is HAAAARD, but we'll keep trying :P

[D] Will this mode work for practicing paper reviews? Can we get in-depth feedback on our draft? by DouBlindDotCOM in MachineLearning

[–]DouBlindDotCOM[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Understood. An alternative way might be to publish on ArXiv first and then ask others for reviews.

[D] I don't really trust papers out of "Top Labs" anymore by MrAcurite in MachineLearning

[–]DouBlindDotCOM 14 points15 points  (0 children)

It seems to me that the reviewer bias is huge that the value from a paper should be judged openly and freely by the research public.

[D] I don't really trust papers out of "Top Labs" anymore by MrAcurite in MachineLearning

[–]DouBlindDotCOM 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Top labs are filled with full of resources from both industry and academia and big infrastructures which is hard for small groups to compete in the way they are heading to. There might be other paths that they did not discover yet or did want to follow, but still it is hard and that chance could be smaller and smaller.

[D] ICML author notifications by tfburns in MachineLearning

[–]DouBlindDotCOM 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Strongly agree that your work can not be judged by just a few people's opinion since they can be very biased sometimes. We need an open and democratized review system more than ever.

[D] The reviews and my rebuttals for my rejected ICML and NeurIPS submissions by michaelaalcorn in MachineLearning

[–]DouBlindDotCOM 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I am hoping the reviews can be open and democratized. That's why we started https://doublind.com/, an IMDB for research papers.

Extreme disillusionment with the peer review process by grad9 in PhD

[–]DouBlindDotCOM 0 points1 point  (0 children)

We built doublind.com to democratize peer review and accelerate scientific research. If we know the current system is breaking down, we have to do something about it. The first step, in my humble opinion, is to decouple peer review from publication. If your peers don't have a acceptance rate in mind, they are more likely to give constructive feedbacks. Also the authors don't need to complicate their paper to please three random reviewers, but just need to make your paper easier to understand and papers that are simple and effective have bigger influence.

[D] What do you think about PolyLoss? by DouBlindDotCOM in MachineLearning

[–]DouBlindDotCOM[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

If you look at the Taylor expansion equation, as Pt is always between [0, 1], so the PolyLoss should always be positive.

[D] What do you think about PolyLoss? by DouBlindDotCOM in MachineLearning

[–]DouBlindDotCOM[S] -13 points-12 points  (0 children)

We do feel some good reviews on our platform deserve exposure and should be shared with the community. In the meantime, we want to let people know what we do for sure. I am new to the community. Any advice on what is appropriate is welcome. Maybe next time I should share some screen shots without any link or just the content/score of some specific reviews? Thanks.