为了提供一个畅所欲言的学术交流渠道，我们欢迎研究者们发表点评论文的帖子。具体形式为：
- 搜索论坛检查是否已存在该论文对应的主题
- 若有则跟帖、给论文打分
- 若无则创建主题
- 在标题框内粘贴论文的链接，系统会自动填写标题
- 简要描述论文解决了什么问题、用了什么方法之类，形式自由但尽量客观
- 主观地评论论文的优缺点
- 最后创建一个投票，公开给论文评分。模板如下：
[poll type=regular results=always public=true chartType=bar]
# Rating
* 5: Transformative: This paper is likely to change our field. It should be considered for a best paper award.
* 4.5: Exciting: It changed my thinking on this topic. I would fight for it to be accepted.
* 4: Strong: I learned a lot from it. I would like to see it accepted.
* 3.5: Leaning positive: It can be accepted more or less in its current form. However, the work it describes is not particularly exciting and/or inspiring, so it will not be a big loss if people don't see it in this conference.
* 3: Ambivalent: It has merits (e.g., it reports state-of-the-art results, the idea is nice), but there are key weaknesses (e.g., I didn't learn much from it, evaluation is not convincing, it describes incremental work). I believe it can significantly benefit from another round of revision, but I won't object to accepting it if my co-reviewers are willing to champion it.
* 2.5: Leaning negative: I am leaning towards rejection, but I can be persuaded if my co-reviewers think otherwise.
* 2: Mediocre: I would rather not see it in the conference.
* 1.5: Weak: I am pretty confident that it should be rejected.
* 1: Poor: I would fight to have it rejected.
[/poll]
如果你需要创建一个新的板块或申请版主，请PM @hankcs 协助。我们将按奖励机制为参与者提供包括语料和算力在内的奖励。