Conference appendices outgrow page limits
Long appendices are turning ICML and NeurIPS papers into de facto journal-length submissions. The post argues that if core claims depend on dozens of extra pages of experiments, the conference format is no longer serving its original purpose.
This feels less like a formatting issue and more like an incentive problem: conference review norms now reward appendix-heavy papers even when the main text cannot stand alone.
- –Page caps only mean something if the main paper contains the essential argument, evidence, and limitations.
- –Once key experiments move to the appendix, “supplementary” material becomes part of the real submission.
- –The trend helps reproducibility and completeness, but it also raises the bar for smaller labs that cannot bankroll sprawling experiment suites.
- –A cleaner norm would be shorter conference papers with truly optional appendices, plus explicit journal-style outlets for extended versions.
DISCOVERED
62d ago
2026-03-28
PUBLISHED
63d ago
2026-03-27
RELEVANCE
AUTHOR
kostaspap90
