# Has ACL Lost Its Crown? A Decade-Long Quantitative Analysis of Scale and Impact Across Leading AI Conferences

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2512.04448 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2512.04448/

## Key facts

- Cited by 1 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- First posted on arXiv 4 Dec 2025.

## Built on by (most cited first, 1 of 1)

- [Reviewer Scores Are Not Comparable Across Research Areas in ML Peer Review](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2607.27209/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

The recent surge of language models (LMs) has rapidly expanded NLP/AI research, driving an exponential rise in submissions and acceptances at major conferences. Yet this growth has been shadowed by escalating concerns over conference quality, such as plagiarism, reviewer inexperience, and collusive bidding. However, existing studies rely largely on qualitative accounts, for example expert interviews and social media discussions, lacking longitudinal empirical evidence. To fill this gap, we conduct a ten-year empirical study (2014-2024) spanning seven leading conferences. We build a four-dimensional bibliometric framework covering conference scale, core citation statistics, impact dispersion, and cross-venue and journal influence. Notably, we further propose a metric called Quality-Quantity Elasticity (QQE), which measures the elasticity of citation growth relative to acceptance growth. We highlight two key findings. First, conference expansion does not lead to proportional growth in scholarly impact, as QQE consistently declines over time across all venues. Second, ACL has not lost its crown, continuing to outperform other NLP conferences in median citations, milestone contributions, and citation coverage. This study provides the first decade-long, cross-venue empirical evidence on the evolution of major NLP/AI conferences. Our code is available at https://anonymous.4open.science/r/acl-crown-analysis-38D5.