Best of ArXiv.org for AI, Machine Learning, and Deep Learning – November 2017

[ghosthamlet]

https://insidebigdata.com/2017/11/27/best-of-arxiv-for-machine-learning-february-2016/

[nerdponx]

Is there a way to track which Arxiv papers get republished in peer-reviewed journals?

[nl → nerdponx]

Not really, AFIAK. You can check https://openreview.net/ though.

Most Arxiv papers from Google/FB/OpenAI get a pretty good review on Twitter and /r/MachineLearning.

Some Arxiv papers say "under review for NIPS (or whatever)".

[chillee → nl]

Openreview is only for iclr, so you'll be missing a lot of papers.

To the above poster, in ML journals aren't the main means of publication. You want to look at conferences like ICLR, NIPS, CVPR, etc.

[nl → chillee]

Some NIPS workshops use Openreview[1].

(I kind of assumed the poster meant "journals or conference proceedings")

[1] https://openreview.net/group?id=NIPS.cc/2017/Workshop/Autodi...

[chillee → nl]

Yep I'm aware haha.

I made https://chillee.github.io/OpenReviewExplorer/, so I'd love if all conferences used openreview.

[nl → chillee]

Nice.. maybe you could fix the NIPS website too? ;)

[chillee → nl]

Hmm, what do you mean by that? Not sure what I could add to the nips website from what they provide

[JustFinishedBSG]

Please stop with those "Best of AI papers".

This isn't how science work, this isn't how anything works

[chillee → JustFinishedBSG]

What's your problem with these lists?

I don't think making these lists is necessarily incompatible with the peer review process. Orals or spotlight presentations at conferences are effectively "best of" lists anyways.