Home > Meta > Welcome to Not Relevant

Welcome to Not Relevant

This blog was born out of reading complaints from lots of people that their SIGIR paper was rejected.  Ok, we’ve all been there, most of it is probably sour grapes but surely there are some gems there (including yours, my friend!).

So your paper got rejected with three two-liner reviews and a metareview that reads (summary) “Zzz. uh wah?”  What can you do?  You have three traditional choices:

  1. Send it off to the next conference (with optional revisions)
  2. Send it off to a journal (with optional revisions)
  3. Cry in your beer

But now you have a fourth option.  Send it to Not Relevant.  Our crack team of experienced IR researchers will review your paper (probably for the second time) and attempt to guide it towards publication here.  Think of us as an online journal for papers that the conference just doesn’t seem to get.

We aren’t agreeing to publish everything we get.  We are trying to find the discarded diamonds, the wheat in the chaff.  Everyone knows that conference review processes are fallible, and we want to be the sieve that holds the great stuff that they missed.

The editorial board and reviewing criteria are in process.  Stay tuned, or contact us if you want to be involved.

Advertisements
Categories: Meta Tags: ,
  1. Omar Alonso
    March 25, 2010 at 12:34 pm

    This is a great idea. Looking forward to more details.

  2. nt
    March 25, 2010 at 2:23 pm

    Is this for sigir2010 only?

    • March 25, 2010 at 2:48 pm

      No, but the pages I’ve started posting on the right sidebar list subject areas. (Which of course are open to discussion.)

  3. Mounia Lalmas
    March 26, 2010 at 8:48 am

    If you are serious, then I am interested. I would love to look into stuff that is not standard, that is hard and will take time to make it work but is inspiring, and where the aim is not just about beating some baseline :-)

  4. John
    March 26, 2010 at 9:40 am

    “Not Relevant” sounds more like a journal for papers that did get accepted, but should not have been:)

    I’m quite certain there are many papers accepted, that are of very limited interest to the community as a whole (either because of limited quality, lack of novelty, or missing analyses). I guess that might even be a bigger problem than a good paper not getting accepted, since those papers end up at other conferences anyway.

  5. Chandra
    March 26, 2010 at 6:59 pm

    Interesting idea.

    Reviewing is not easy, but one of the messages here is that the reviewing process needs a remake/upgrade. For example, do we need a rebuttal phase? Should we do a controlled experiment where we split reviewers into 2 groups have them both look at some papers and compare what they decide about these papers? etc etc

    This is something we should take up in the SIGIR (and other) business meetings.

    On a lighter note, if you’d called this IR-relevant, you could have squeezed in IR into the title! :-)

  1. March 26, 2010 at 6:20 pm
  2. July 26, 2010 at 6:55 am

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: