This will be description of this different sorts of paper at COLING 2018

it is vital to select the paper that is right in purchase to help get top quality reviews for the work. Remember that all paper kinds utilize the same template; download the phrase and LaTeX templates right right right here: coling2018.zip

Computationally-aided analysis that is linguistic

The main focus with this paper kind is brand new insight that is linguistic. It could take the type of an empirical research of some linguistic sensation, or of a theoretical outcome in regards to a linguistically-relevant system that is formal.

1. Relevance: Is this paper highly relevant to COLING?
2. Readability/clarity: From the real means the paper is written, is it possible to tell just exactly just what research concern had been addressed, the thing that was done and just why, and exactly how the outcome relate genuinely to the study concern?
3. Originality: How original and revolutionary may be the research described? Originality could possibly be in the question that is linguistic addressed, into the methodology put on the linguistic concern, or perhaps in the blend for the two.
4. Technical correctness/soundness: may be the extensive research described in the paper theoretically sound and proper? Is one able to trust the claims for the paper—are they sustained by the analysis or experiments as they are the total results precisely interpreted?
5. Reproducibility: will there be detail that is sufficient somebody in identical industry to reproduce/replicate the outcome? n/a for many 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 compelling explanation offered why this is simply not feasible?
7. Generalizability: Does the plagiarism checker paper show exactly how the outcomes generalize, either by deepening our knowledge of some system that is linguistic basic or by showing methodology that may be placed on other dilemmbecause too? n/a for many forms of theoretical results
8. Significant contrast: Does the paper clearly spot the described make use of respect to literature that is existing? Could it be clear both what exactly is novel within the research presented and just how it develops on previous work?
9. Substance: performs this paper have sufficient substance for the paper that is full-length or wouldn’t it benefit from further development?
10. General recommendation: there are numerous good submissions contending for slots at COLING 2018; essential will it be to feature this 1? Will people learn a complete great deal by scanning this paper or seeing it presented? Please be decisive—it is way better to vary from other reviewers rather than grade every thing at the center.

NLP engineering test paper

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

1. Relevance: Is this paper highly relevant to COLING?
2. Readability/clarity: Through the real method the paper is written, are you able to inform just exactly what research concern was addressed, the thing that was done and just why, and exactly how the outcomes relate genuinely to the investigation concern?
   1. Can it be clear what the authors’ hypothesis is? The facts? A text input reponse
   2. Will it be clear the way the writers have tested their theory? y/n
3. Originality: How initial and revolutionary could be the extensive research described? Observe that originality could include a brand new method or a fresh task, or it may lie within the careful analysis of what the results are whenever an understood strategy is put on a known task (where in actuality the pairing is novel) or into the careful analysis of what are the results each time a understood strategy is put on an understood task in a language that is new.
4. Technical correctness/soundness: may be the research described in the paper technically sound and proper? Is one able to trust the claims for the paper—are they sustained by the analysis or experiments and therefore are the results precisely interpreted?
   1. Will it be clear the way the results confirm/refute the theory, or will 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 plainly described and therefore are they suitable for testing the theory as mentioned?
5. Reproducibility: Is there adequate information for some body in identical industry to reproduce/replicate the outcomes?
6. Data/code access: could be the data/code (as appropriate) open to the study community or perhaps is here a reason that is compelling why it is not feasible?
7. Error analysis: Does the paper provide an error that is thoughtful, which actively seeks linguistic patterns within the forms of mistakes created by the system(s) examined and sheds light on either avenues for future work or perhaps the way to obtain the strengths/weaknesses associated with systems?
8. Significant contrast: Does the paper clearly destination the described make use of respect to literature that is existing? Could it be clear both what exactly is novel within the extensive research presented and just how it develops on previous work?
9. Substance: performs this paper have enough substance for a paper that is full-length or would it not reap the benefits of further work?
10. General recommendation: there are numerous good submissions contending for slots at COLING 2018; essential could it be to feature this 1? Will people discover a complete great deal by scanning this paper or seeing it presented? Please be decisive—it is much better to vary from other reviewers rather than grade every thing in the centre.