Summary

• Adds a new Section 11 to the publication roadmap document that provides a rigorous and honest assessment of what would be required to publish in a main track venue (NeurIPS, ICML, ICLR) rather than a workshop
• Includes honest evaluation of why current work is workshop-level (prompt engineering, not ML research)
• Provides four technical contribution options with effort estimates to elevate the work
• Details additional experiments, timeline, resources, and honest recommendations

Changes

11.1 Honest Assessment: Why Current Work is Workshop-Level

• Core contribution is prompt engineering, not ML research
• Table of anticipated reviewer concerns with severity levels

11.2 Required Technical Contributions (Options to Elevate)

• Option A: Learned Demo Retrieval (2-3 months, RECOMMENDED) - Train retrieval to optimize action accuracy
• Option B: Learned Prompt Synthesis (3-4 months) - Learn optimal demo formatting/compression
• Option C: Behavioral Cloning with Demo-Augmentation (4-6 months) - Fine-tune VLM with demo attention
• Option D: Theoretical Analysis (2-3 months) - Information-theoretic analysis

11.3 Additional Experiments Required

• Full WAA (50+ tasks, 3 seeds), WebArena (100+ tasks)
• Episode success rate, multi-model comparison, ablation studies
• Statistical significance requirements

11.4 Timeline and Resources

• Minimum 6-7 months for main track
• 1-2 dedicated researchers (FTE)
• $2-5k GPU compute, $1-3k API credits

11.5 Honest Recommendation

• Small team: Focus on workshop paper
• Dedicated resources: Pursue Option A (Learned Retrieval)
• Clear guidance on when NOT to attempt main track

11.6 Additional References

• REALM, Atlas, DocPrompting (retrieval-augmented learning)
• APE, DSPy, PromptBreeder (automatic prompt engineering)
• CogAgent, SeeClick, RT-2 (GUI agent fine-tuning)

Test plan

• Verify markdown renders correctly on GitHub
• Verify Table of Contents link works
• Review content for accuracy and completeness

Generated with Claude Code