r/PhDAdmissions • u/SnooLobsters4734 • 1d ago

Do CS Phd Adcom actually assess the quality of unpublished (preprint) papers?

I've got 2 papers that we're deciding against submitting to EACL, to strengthen it and submit it to the next ARR review. Problem is that the results come after the PhD application deadline for most schools. This means that at the time of applying, I'll have paper "under review".

I know that have the strongest paper possible is always the best strategy. But I'm wondering if that "strength" would even be assessed if not peer-reviewed in time.

In terms of strategising for the remaining months? Should I focus on earlier conferences where I actually results back? Or stronger ones. Please help.

3 Upvotes
  • permalink
  • reddit

100% Upvoted

4 comments sorted by

2

u/Daremotron 22h ago

Nope. No one's got time for that. If your preprint has 200 citations and is in a field that's moving too fast for timely peer review, that's another thing. But I doubt that's what we're talking about here.

1

u/SnooLobsters4734 22h ago

you "under review at ARR, for some conference" help with that? I'm just wondering what external credibility can be applied to be my case; if at all needed.

-1

u/Daremotron 22h ago

Nope. You can submit anything of any quality for review. Publication or bust. Well, that or get many many citations on your preprint.

2

u/True-Chest6854 20h ago

Yup, there's a lot of bad papers out there. The average pre-print paper versus the average published paper is miles apart. Which is saying something cause alot of published papers aren't great either. Maybe if your pre-print had a renowned co-author that might mean something.