Inspired by Alec Jacobson and Colin Raffel, we will be discussing papers in the many-to-many role-playing format.
For every paper, we will randomly assign people to fulfill the following roles:
During discussion session, each role would first present their arguments and then we proceed to an open-floor discussion. Here is a loose timeline:
(2 min) Instructor Opening The instructor will presents the overall premise of the paper to set the basic context of the paper.
(5 min) Pro Reviewer Argues why the paper should be accepted. e.g. Stating some good points that the paper makes, how does it advance state of knowledge and likely to withstand the test of time. Arguing why the experiments convincingly demonstrate the hypotheses.
(5 min) Con Reviewer Argues why the paper should NOT be accepted. e.g. Arguing why the paper fails to deliver the key promise, where are the fundamental issues in the theory/experimental methodology/premise. Why the paper does not show enough novelty. Why its results may not be significant or good enough.
(5 min) Archaeologist Identifies where this paper fits into the literature. e,g, Where the frontier of the literature lay before this paper came about, which problems in these prior work does this paper address. What papers have come after and built on this work to address new problems or what papers have built on the insights brought up in this paper.
(5 min) Discussion Leader Quickly summarize the main results and the debate, like an Area Chair.
(15 min) Open-floor discussion The discussion leader shall host the open-floor discussion by preparing questions to facilitate discussions. Everyone is welcome to bring up additional points or questions during this time.
Time Limit During presentation, each role needs to finish their speech within the allocated time. People shall feel free to ask questions and such interactions will not count towards the time limit. We will hint to each role the remaining time and cut off the presentation when the time runs out.
Slide Limit During presentation, every speaker can only display one page slide. If you really need to display figures / list evidence to strength your point, two slides are acceptable. We encourage you to make less point but make your point strong & clear by doing an in-depth analysis to validate the significance of your claim / question. We would love to have comprehensive review but, due to the time limit, we hope you to focus on stating things that can go beyond the content of the paper.