论文评审提问：实验结果亮眼但写作极差的论文该如何处理

Paper review question [D]

AI 导读

一位审稿人在 r/MachineLearning 提问：面对实验结果亮眼但表达极差的论文，评审该给写作质量多大权重。他正在审的论文引言没有任何引用，难以判断其贡献相对已有方法的位置。他想知道，若技术贡献和实验都扎实，presentation 差是否足以判拒稿或大修。

正文

I'm curious how other reviewers handle papers that report impressive results but are extremely poorly written. I'm not just talking about grammar, etc. I am more concerned about the overall presentation of ideas and how the authors position their contributions within the existing literature.

For example, I'm currently reviewing a paper that reports promising results but includes no citations in its introduction. This makes it hard to understand where the work stands relative to existing methods and what's new.

My question is how much weight should we give to the quality of writing and presentation when reviewing a paper? If the technical contributions seem solid and the experimental results are strong, is poor presentation enough to justify a rejection or a major revision? I'd be interested to hear how other reviewers approach this.

submitted by /u/Few-Annual-157
[link] [留言]