This is certainly description associated with the various kinds of paper at COLING 2018

This is certainly description associated with the various kinds of paper at COLING 2018

it is vital to select the right paper type to be able to assist get high quality reviews for the work. Observe that all paper kinds utilize the template that is same download your message and LaTeX templates right right here: coling2018.zip

Computationally-aided linguistic analysis

The main focus of the paper kind is brand new linguistic understanding. It could take the type of an empirical research of some linguistic occurrence, or of a theoretical outcome of a linguistically-relevant system that is formal.

  1. Relevance: Is this paper relevant to COLING?
  2. Readability/clarity: Through the means the paper is created, could you inform exactly just what research concern had been addressed, the thing that was done and just why, and exactly how the outcomes relate solely to the investigation concern?
  3. Originality: How initial and revolutionary may be the extensive research described? Originality could possibly be within the linguistic concern being addressed, into the methodology put on the linguistic concern, or perhaps in the blend associated with two.
  4. Technical correctness/soundness: may be the research described in the paper theoretically sound and proper? Is one able to trust the claims associated with the paper—are they supported by the analysis or experiments and therefore are the total results correctly interpreted?
  5. Reproducibility: will there be sufficient information for somebody in identical industry to reproduce/replicate the outcome? n/a for several forms of theoretical results
  6. Data/code access: could be the data/code (as appropriate) open to the investigation community or perhaps is here a reason that is compelling why it is not feasible?
  7. Generalizability: Does the paper show just how the outcomes generalize, either by deepening our knowledge of some system that is linguistic basic or by showing methodology which can be put on other dilemmsince aswell? n/a for several forms of theoretical results
  8. Significant contrast: Does the paper clearly position the described make use of respect to literature that is existing? Will it be clear both what’s novel into the extensive research presented and just how it develops on earlier in the day work?
  9. Substance: performs this paper have sufficient substance for a full-length paper, or would it not take advantage of further development?
  10. General suggestion: there are lots of good submissions contending for slots at COLING 2018; essential could it be to feature that one? Will people discover a complete great deal by scanning this paper or seeing it presented? Please be decisive—it is much better to change from other reviewers rather than grade every thing in the centre.

NLP engineering test paper

This paper kind fits the majority of submissions at present CL and NLP seminars.

  1. Relevance: Is it paper highly relevant to COLING?
  2. Readability/clarity: Through the real means the paper is created, are you able to inform just exactly just what research concern had been addressed, that which was done and exactly why, and just how the outcome relate solely to the study concern?
    1. Can it be clear what the authors’ hypothesis is? What exactly is it? A text input reponse
    2. Will it be clear the way the writers have actually tested their theory? y/n
  3. Originality: How initial and revolutionary may be the research described? Observe that originality could include an innovative new method or a fresh task, or it may lie into the careful analysis of what the results are whenever an understood strategy is placed on a known task (in which the pairing is novel) or perhaps into the careful analysis of what goes on each time an understood technique is placed on an understood task in a language that is new.
  4. Technical correctness/soundness: may be the research described in the paper theoretically sound and proper? Is one able to trust the claims of this paper—are they supported by the analysis or experiments and generally are the total results correctly interpreted?
    1. Can it be clear the way the total outcomes confirm/refute the theory, or would be the outcomes inconclusive?
    2. Perform some writers explain how a outcomes follow from their theory (rather than state, other feasible confounding element)?
    3. Will be the datasets utilized demonstrably described and so are they suitable for testing the theory as previously mentioned?
  5. Reproducibility: will there be adequate detail for some body in identical industry to reproduce/replicate the outcome?
  6. Data/code supply: could be the data/code write paper for you (as appropriate) open to the investigation community or is here a reason that is compelling why this is simply not feasible?
  7. Error analysis: Does the paper provide an error that is thoughtful, which actively seeks linguistic habits when you look at the kinds of errors produced by the system(s) examined and sheds light on either avenues for future work or perhaps the supply of the strengths/weaknesses associated with the systems?
  8. Meaningful contrast: Does the paper clearly position the described make use of respect to literature that is existing? Is it clear both what’s novel within the extensive research presented and just how it develops on previous work?
  9. Substance: performs this paper have enough substance for a full-length paper, or would it not reap the benefits of further work?
  10. General suggestion: there are lots of submissions that are good for slots at COLING 2018; essential will it be to feature that one? Will people discover great deal by looking over this paper or seeing it presented? Please be decisive—it is much better to change from other reviewers rather than grade every thing at the center.