@Joanne said in KDD 2025 2nd-round Review Results: How Did Your Paper Do?:
KDD 2025 (February Cycle) – What the Score Patterns Reveal
After combing through 22 self-reported results, three consistent patterns jump out:
All-3’s are not lethal. Several papers with a flat 3-3 profile survived because nobody down-voted hard and the Area Chair (AC) was on their side.
4–2 vs 3–3 is still a coin-flip. A spiky 4–2 pair can trump steady 3–3s, yet clean consistency sometimes wins when the AC trusts uniform support.
Reviewer kindness matters. A single upgrade (e.g., Technical 3 → 4) in the last round carried borderline submissions over the line.
Who Actually Got In? – Mini Score Sheet
Alias
Final Mean (N / T)
Earlier Lows
Verdict
author 1 #1
3.6 / 4.0
early 3-3-4 mix
Accept
author 1 #2
3.6 / 3.4
weaker T
Accept
author 2
≈ 3.2 / 2.8
one reviewer gave 2 / 2
Accept — “kind-hearted AC”
author 3
3.0 / 3.0
flat all-3’s
Accept
author 4
3.0 / 3.0
two negative votes (2 / 2)
Accept
author 5
3.4 / 4.0
T started 3-3-2-2-2
Accept — generous reviewer bumped T to 4
Messages from this Small Sample
≈ 3.0 averages can pass — the AC’s veto (positive or negative) is the real gatekeeper.
One low score plus a confident critique can still sink you — numbers alone aren’t everything.
Polite, point-by-point rebuttals can move scores, though not as often as we’d like.
How's your scores? We will make a new pattern after you share with us your.
Thanks for sharing! mine got rejected though -- mean T score 2.5-ish
