KDD 2025 2nd-round Review Results: How Did Your Paper Do?
-
Stats from official email:
The Research Track of KDD 2025 (February Cycle) received 1988 submissions, with an overall acceptance rate of ~18.4%. All submissions received at least three reviews, while most had four or five. Area Chairs provided meta-reviews and preliminary recommendations, which were deliberated further by the Senior Area Chairs and decided on by the Program Chairs.
...
A submission rejected from the Research Track may not be resubmitted within 12 months to the KDD Research Track (i.e., the earliest resubmission date of your paper to the KDD research track is February 2026).
-
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
3-3profile 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
4–2pair can trump steady3–3s, 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 3-3-4mix
Acceptauthor 1 #2 3.6 / 3.4 weaker T Acceptauthor 2 ≈ 3.2 / 2.8 one reviewer gave 2 / 2 Accept — “kind-hearted AC”author 3 3.0 / 3.0 flat all-3’s Acceptauthor 4 3.0 / 3.0 two negative votes ( 2 / 2) Acceptauthor 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.
- All-3’s are not lethal. Several papers with a flat
-
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
3-3profile 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
4–2pair can trump steady3–3s, 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 3-3-4mix Acceptauthor 1 #2 3.6 / 3.4 weaker T Acceptauthor 2 ≈ 3.2 / 2.8 one reviewer gave 2 / 2 Accept — “kind-hearted AC”author 3 3.0 / 3.0 flat all-3’s Acceptauthor 4 3.0 / 3.0 two negative votes ( 2 / 2) Acceptauthor 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.
@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
3-3profile 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
4–2pair can trump steady3–3s, 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 3-3-4mix Acceptauthor 1 #2 3.6 / 3.4 weaker T Acceptauthor 2 ≈ 3.2 / 2.8 one reviewer gave 2 / 2 Accept — “kind-hearted AC”author 3 3.0 / 3.0 flat all-3’s Acceptauthor 4 3.0 / 3.0 two negative votes ( 2 / 2) Acceptauthor 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
- All-3’s are not lethal. Several papers with a flat
-
@cocktailfreedom Thanks for sharing that and sorry to hear about the rejection. A 2.5 mean T score definitely stings, but it says nothing about your potential or the value of your work long term. Peer review can be noisy, biased, or just not aligned with where your idea fits best.
Let me share Saining Xie's comment “I wouldn’t call conferences a lottery, but a bit of perseverance does go a long way.”
