Venue: ICLR 2017 workshop

Reviews:

final_score: rating: 3: Clear rejection
review_content: This paper presents the design process of upcoming challenges in spatio-temporal forecasting tasks. The work proposes a 'hackathon-type setup' where teams are presented with new data and are expected to build a reasonable model.

This approach seems interesting, but the paper is unclear in writing and confusing as to details of the task, which seems to be video prediction.  Furthermore, the hackathon-type setup seems incompatible with existing work in video prediction which should take much longer than a few hours to develop and train, even with a starter kit.  If only code can be written during the hackathon and evaluated after, it is unclear whether this can be a successful setup.  
review_title: unclear and leaves questions

final_score: rating: 4: Ok but not good enough - rejection
review_content: This workshop paper presents a platform for a competition on spatial-time forecasting (e.g., video), based on CodeLab.
1. Logistic: Multiple teams will attend this competition and are given an iPython notebook to start with. They need to finish their codes in 3 hours and submit.  A coach is assigned to each team to solve any technical problems. 
2. Authors have collected a talking-to-camera video dataset focusing on face for the competition, and mentioned the data preprocessing step in details.
3. Some baseline methods have been implemented and their performances are listed in Table 1. 

There are many issues to be answered. For example:
1. The target of this competition is not clear. The data are preprocessed to focus on faces and the topic is spatial-time forecasting. An obvious guess is to predict the pixels of some future frame, which can also be inferred from the description of the baseline methods and error metric. However, it is not clear whether the competition wants to predict the next frame, or focused on long-term prediction. It is also not clear whether there are other related tasks. 

2. The purpose is not clear. Who will attend the competition? Why is time limited to 3 hours? How many libraries are provided? Are all the attendants expected to reimplement state-of-the-art previous methods in an more efficient way, or to develop a novel approach for this particular task? or to test their ability to efficiently find the right submodules and combine from a massive number of libraries? Why team work is needed? It is not clear. 

Overall, I feel this workshop paper, as a proposal, needs to be further revised. 
review_title: Review

Decision: Reject