Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Paper Copilot
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse
CSPaper

CSPaper: review sidekick

Go to CCFDDL
Go to CSRankings
Go to OpenReview
  1. Home
  2. Peer Review in Computer Science: good, bad & broken
  3. Data Mining & Database
  4. KDD 2025 2nd-round Review Results: How Did Your Paper Do?

KDD 2025 2nd-round Review Results: How Did Your Paper Do?

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Data Mining & Database
kdd2025rebuttal
20 Posts 10 Posters 1.1k Views
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • H Offline
    H Offline
    Hu8kKo34
    Super Users
    wrote on last edited by
    #11

    Anyone knows the likelihood of an NLP (LLM agent and its evaluation on many public datasets) work accepted to KDD, either main or applied data science track?

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • Nilesh VermaN Offline
      Nilesh VermaN Offline
      Nilesh Verma
      wrote on last edited by
      #12

      what are the chances of acceptance in KDD feb, here is my score

      Relevance: 3.5 (based on 4, 3, 4, 3, 4)
      Novelty: 3.0 (based on 4, 3, 2, 3, 2)
      Technical Quality: 3.0 (based on 3, 3, 3, 3, 3)
      Presentation: 2.8 (based on 3, 3, 3, 2, 3)
      Reproducibility: 3.0 (based on 3, 3, 3, 3, 3)
      Reviewer Confidence: 3.4 (based on 3, 4, 3, 4, 3)

      SylviaS Hsi Ping LiH 2 Replies Last reply
      1
      • Nilesh VermaN Nilesh Verma

        what are the chances of acceptance in KDD feb, here is my score

        Relevance: 3.5 (based on 4, 3, 4, 3, 4)
        Novelty: 3.0 (based on 4, 3, 2, 3, 2)
        Technical Quality: 3.0 (based on 3, 3, 3, 3, 3)
        Presentation: 2.8 (based on 3, 3, 3, 2, 3)
        Reproducibility: 3.0 (based on 3, 3, 3, 3, 3)
        Reviewer Confidence: 3.4 (based on 3, 4, 3, 4, 3)

        SylviaS Offline
        SylviaS Offline
        Sylvia
        Super Users
        wrote on last edited by root
        #13

        @Nilesh-Verma from what I hear, Novelty and TQ (combined with confidence) are two most important dimension for making the final decision. I think TQ scores are pretty good; Novelty scores are not bad either. If rebuttal can increase one of the "2"s to 3, then the chance of getting an acceptance will be even higher.

        1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • rootR Offline
          rootR Offline
          root
          wrote on last edited by root
          #14

          I hereby paste the historical acceptance rate of KDD research tracks

          Conference Long Paper Acceptance Rate
          KDD'14 14.6% (151/1036)
          KDD'15 19.5% (160/819)
          KDD'16 13.7% (142/1115)
          KDD'17 17.4% (130/748)
          KDD'18 18.4% (181/983) (107 orals and 74 posters)
          KDD'19 14.2% (170/1200) (110 orals and 60 posters)
          KDD'20 16.9% (216/1279)
          KDD'22 15.0% (254/1695)
          KDD'23 22.1% (313/1416)
          KDD'24 20.0% (411/2046)

          Note that KDD'24 accepted 151 ADS track papers from 738 submissions!

          1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • SylviaS Offline
            SylviaS Offline
            Sylvia
            Super Users
            wrote on last edited by
            #15

            The KDD PC just opened the comment phase until Apr 18 (AoE). You can respond to reviewer follow-ups or raise concerns to AC/SAC via the Official Comment button.

            ⚠️ A few don’ts:

            • No URLs — they’ll auto-delete your comment.
            • No bypassing rebuttal limits — don’t treat comments as extra rebuttal space.
            • Don’t badger reviewers — 1 ping is enough.
            • Stay respectful — tone matters.

            Good luck everyone 🤞

            1 Reply Last reply
            1
            • riverR river

              I made a summary of data points from KDD 2025 1st round results:

              Novelty Scores Technical Quality Scores Confidence Scores Rebuttal Outcome Final Decision Notes
              3 3 3 3 3 3 4 3 3 2 3 2 – Addressed issues ✅ Accepted "Rebuttal is so difficult with all the twists and turns"
              2 2 3 2 2 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 Submitted ❌ Rejected "Can I just run away?"
              4 3 3 1 4 4 2 2 – Explained issues ❌ Rejected "Large variance across reviewers; no score changes post-rebuttal"
              3 3 3 3 3 2 – Unsure 🟡 Unknown "Still considering rebuttal; not sure if it's worth the effort"
              3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 – Minor clarifications ✅ Accepted "Final scores unchanged but accepted after positive AC decision"
              3 4 3 3 3 3 2 2 3 2 2 3 – Clarified results ❌ Rejected "Novelty OK, but TQ too weak; didn't convince reviewers"
              3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Submitted ✅ Accepted "Strong consensus; one of the smoother cases"
              3 3 3 3 3 2 – No rebuttal ❌ Rejected "No rebuttal submitted; borderline scores"
              3 3 2 2 3 3 2 2 – Rebuttal sent ❌ Rejected "Reviewers did not change their opinion"
              3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 – Rebuttal helped ✅ Accepted "Accepted despite one weaker reviewer"
              3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Rebuttal sent 🟡 Unknown "In limbo; waiting for final decision"
              3 3 3 3 2 2 2 2 – Not convincing ❌ Rejected "Work deemed not ‘KDD-level’ despite rebuttal"
              3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Submitted ✅ Accepted "Perfectly consistent reviewers; smooth acceptance"
              3 3 3 2 3 3 2 2 – Rebuttal failed ❌ Rejected "Low technical quality and variance led to rejection"

              📌 Note: Data sourced from community discussions on Zhihu, Reddit, and OpenReview threads. Subject to sample bias.

              Hsi Ping LiH Offline
              Hsi Ping LiH Offline
              Hsi Ping Li
              wrote last edited by Hsi Ping Li
              #16

              @river Hi river,

              Excuse me, do you know if these scores are the final scores after the rebuttal? Really appreciate it if you could provide more information about this 🙂

              riverR 1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • Nilesh VermaN Nilesh Verma

                what are the chances of acceptance in KDD feb, here is my score

                Relevance: 3.5 (based on 4, 3, 4, 3, 4)
                Novelty: 3.0 (based on 4, 3, 2, 3, 2)
                Technical Quality: 3.0 (based on 3, 3, 3, 3, 3)
                Presentation: 2.8 (based on 3, 3, 3, 2, 3)
                Reproducibility: 3.0 (based on 3, 3, 3, 3, 3)
                Reviewer Confidence: 3.4 (based on 3, 4, 3, 4, 3)

                Hsi Ping LiH Offline
                Hsi Ping LiH Offline
                Hsi Ping Li
                wrote last edited by
                #17

                @Nilesh-Verma Hi Nilesh, I am sure the scores of your paper are higher than those of most authors. Congs. Besides, did your reviewers increase their ratings for your paper in the rebuttal process?

                1 Reply Last reply
                1
                • Hsi Ping LiH Hsi Ping Li

                  @river Hi river,

                  Excuse me, do you know if these scores are the final scores after the rebuttal? Really appreciate it if you could provide more information about this 🙂

                  riverR Offline
                  riverR Offline
                  river
                  wrote last edited by
                  #18

                  @Hsi-Ping-Li

                  This the best effort scores, meaning I take the latest available scores reported in the community. If they are updated by the authors after rebuttal, then I take that, otherwise I would assume the scores did not change.

                  For the data points with accept/reject outcome, I think all of them are post-rebuttal scores.

                  Hsi Ping LiH 1 Reply Last reply
                  1
                  • M magicparrots

                    A data point:

                    GNN work, got

                    Novelty: 3, 2, 2, 3, 2
                    Technical Quality: 2, 2, 2, 2, 2
                    Confidence: 3, 4, 3, 4, 4

                    Need to rebuttal? anyone knows more? 2 weeks challenge ahead!

                    Hsi Ping LiH Offline
                    Hsi Ping LiH Offline
                    Hsi Ping Li
                    wrote last edited by
                    #19

                    @magicparrots

                    Hi magicparrots!

                    did the reviewers raise their scores for your paper after the rebuttal process?
                    I also submitted a paper about GNN, and only one reviewer out of five raised 1 score for my paper 😞

                    1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • riverR river

                      @Hsi-Ping-Li

                      This the best effort scores, meaning I take the latest available scores reported in the community. If they are updated by the authors after rebuttal, then I take that, otherwise I would assume the scores did not change.

                      For the data points with accept/reject outcome, I think all of them are post-rebuttal scores.

                      Hsi Ping LiH Offline
                      Hsi Ping LiH Offline
                      Hsi Ping Li
                      wrote last edited by
                      #20

                      @river Many thanks for your details! 🙂

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      Reply
                      • Reply as topic
                      Log in to reply
                      • Oldest to Newest
                      • Newest to Oldest
                      • Most Votes


                      • Login

                      • Don't have an account? Register

                      • Login or register to search.
                      © 2025 CSPaper.org Sidekick of Peer Reviews
                      Debating the highs and lows of peer review in computer science.
                      • First post
                        Last post
                      0
                      • Categories
                      • Recent
                      • Tags
                      • Popular
                      • World
                      • Paper Copilot