Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • AI Reviewer
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse
CSPaper

CSPaper: review sidekick

Go to CCFDDL
Go to CSRankings
Go to OpenReview
  1. Home
  2. Peer Review in Computer Science: good, bad & broken
  3. Computer Vision, Graphics & Robotics
  4. What Does an AC (Area Chair) Actually Do in CV/AI Conferences?

What Does an AC (Area Chair) Actually Do in CV/AI Conferences?

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Computer Vision, Graphics & Robotics
cvprarea chairrebuttalsiggraph
1 Posts 1 Posters 65 Views
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • N Offline
    N Offline
    ntk01-pku
    Super Users
    wrote last edited by
    #1

    Many researchers misunderstand how the review process works in top-tier computer vision conferences. This confusion often causes frustration for both authors and reviewers. Here’s a summary from the perspective of an Area Chair (AC), to clarify common misconceptions and shed light on what the AC’s role really entails.

    what-does-ac-do-in-cv-confereneces.jpg

    What Does an AC Actually Do?

    If you’ve submitted to conferences like CVPR or SIGGRAPH, you might have encountered an AC through:

    • The meta-review you receive,
    • Or during rebuttal and discussion stages.

    But the real job of an AC goes far beyond writing a short summary.

    The AC is like a judge:

    • They coordinate the entire review process.
    • They recruit emergency reviewers if needed.
    • They facilitate discussions among reviewers.
    • They ensure that decisions are well-founded, fair, and aligned with the reviewers’ assessments.

    In short, ACs are responsible for the overall quality control of the review process.


    ❗ Common Misconceptions

    1. My paper’s fate is decided by average review scores.

    ❌ Not true.

    ACs don’t just average the review scores. Instead, they:

    • Analyze each review’s reasoning, both positive and negative.
    • Pay close attention to the rationale behind the scores.

    ➡️ A well-argued low or borderline review might carry more weight than a shallow high score.


    2. ACs have total authority to accept or reject a paper.

    ❌ Also not true.

    In vision conferences, ACs are not omnipotent decision-makers.

    They are more like judges in a debate:

    • Listening to both reviewers (the "prosecution") and authors (the "defense").
    • Making a reasoned recommendation based on the evidence.

    ➡️ The final decision often involves multiple ACs (triplet discussion) and may escalate to senior ACs (SAC) or PC chairs for tough cases.

    So: ACs coordinate and recommend, but don’t decide alone.


    🤝 On Rebuttals and Fairness

    • ACs do not see the authors’ identities, maintaining the double-blind review process.
    • “Backdoor acceptance” via connections or identity is not possible.
    • Good ACs pay attention to authors’ rebuttals, especially when pointing out reviewer misunderstandings.

    🔍 TL;DR: What You Should Know as an Author

    • Don’t just focus on review scores. Make sure your rebuttal addresses core concerns logically and clearly.
    • ACs do read your response carefully, especially if you clarify key misunderstandings.
    • No paper is “doomed” by a single review, but weak rebuttals can hurt your chances.
    • ACs strive for fairness, but they also depend on the quality of the reviewer comments and your reply.

    💡 Insight: “AC decisions are more like a courtroom than a dictatorship.”


    📌 This post is *based on insights shared by Tiankai Xue (CVPR/SIGGRAPH AC)

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
    Reply
    • Reply as topic
    Log in to reply
    • Oldest to Newest
    • Newest to Oldest
    • Most Votes


    • Login

    • Don't have an account? Register

    • Login or register to search.
    © 2025 CSPaper.org Sidekick of Peer Reviews
    Debating the highs and lows of peer review in computer science.
    • First post
      Last post
    0
    • Categories
    • Recent
    • Tags
    • Popular
    • World
    • AI Reviewer