Journal - Reviewing Results
Following a format similar to ACM CHI, we are electing to share more information about the reviewing process. This information is intended to make the reviewing process more transparent and to help guide authors in preparing a rebuttal.
We received 122 submissions. Of these 3 submissions were desk rejected and 1 submission was quick rejected. These papers were either not anonymized or did not contain enough detail to replicate the work.
In total, 118 papers went out for full review. 476 reviews were completed. 114 papers received four reviews and 4 papers received five reviews.
Each paper has an overall score calculated as the mean of the reviewers’ scores. Reviewers rated each submission with the following scale:
6 – Definitely accept: I would argue strongly for accepting this submission.
5 – Probably accept: I would argue for accepting this submission.
4 – Rather accept: But I would not argue for accepting this submission.
3 – Rather reject: But I would not argue for rejecting this submission.
2 – Probably reject: I would argue for rejecting this submission.
1 – Definitely reject: I would argue strongly for rejecting this submission.
The mean paper score was 3.08 (SD=.95). Since this is the first time that ISMAR has switched to having both a journal and conference paper track, we are unable to compare to previous acceptance rates. Assuming a 16% acceptance rate similar to IEEE VR 2021 journal track submissions, papers with a mean score of 4.25 or higher would have a better chance of acceptance. Assuming a 25% acceptance rate, papers with a mean score of 3.75 or higher have a better chance of acceptance. However, score is not the only criteria for paper acceptance. Our goal is to accept papers of high quality and there is no predefined acceptance rate.
Authors are permitted, though not required, to submit a rebuttal. Both reviewer discussion and rebuttals can change the overall score of a paper and influence the final decision. When deciding to write a rebuttal it is important to consider the overall score as well as the content in the reviews. Writing a rebuttal for papers with a low overall score may not be influential enough to change the opinions of all of the reviewers. Everyone is welcome to write a rebuttal and the paper chairs highly encourage authors with an overall score above 3.0 to seriously consider writing a rebuttal.