Event owner lens
Use this record to benchmark whether a comparable event makes the work after the room visible. The score is 41/100, so the next move is to benchmark the weakest pillars before repeating the format.
action-oriented convening agenda analysis
ICML - Self-Improving Language Models for Evolutionary Program Synthesis: A Case Study on ARC-AGI - 2020 - Call for Workshops
This action-oriented convening in Technology / AI / Startup shows 31 visible agenda rows from icml.cc and scores 41/100: a moderate design signal with incomplete evidence. The clearest public signals sit in Participation Architecture and Learning Transfer; the main limits are Follow Through and Network Design. Visible mechanisms include Participant work, Commitments, Network design, and Learning transfer. Follow-through or tracking is at least visible enough to inspect, though causal proof still depends on... A practical reading: For a reader, this is a comparison record more than a model to copy: it reads as an action-oriented convening, with the strongest visible signal in participation architecture and learning transfer and the biggest open question around follow through and network design. The practical test is whether the published agenda connects the room to post-event continuation and evidence. This page is an original public-evidence analysis, not a copy of the source agenda or an endorsement of the event. The score places the visible agenda in the moderate design signal band. The strongest visible pillars are Participation Architecture, Learning Transfer, and Problem Specificity; the thinnest visible pillars are Network Design, Follow Through, and Personalization. Visible mechanisms include Participant work, Commitments, Network design, and Learning transfer. The extracted agenda preview includes 48 visible rows. The most common formats are Workshop, Unknown, and Panel; the most common inferred purposes are Co Creation, Participant Work, and Unknown.
Eight-pillar fingerprint
Hover any pillar to see what it measures and, where it scored low, what the agenda is missing.
Participation Architecture?91
Participation Architecture - 91/100. Participant work, contribution, interaction, and alternatives to passive broadcast.
Follow Through?16
Follow Through - 16/100. Owners, dates, commitments, progress checks, and accountability after the room.Missing: Add named owners, dates, implementation checkpoints, and a visible post-event continuation path.
Problem Specificity?46
Problem Specificity - 46/100. A clear costly problem, objective, decision, or performance target.
Personalization?33
Personalization - 33/100. Role, path, goal, preparation, or connection tailoring for participants.Missing: Create role-based paths, prepared questions, tailored breakouts, or participant-specific next steps.
Network Design?16
Network Design - 16/100. Structured weak ties, bridge-building, mixers, and relationship persistence.Missing: Replace generic networking blocks with designed introductions, ask-offer exchanges, peer groups, or bridge-building rituals.
Learning Transfer?62
Learning Transfer - 62/100. Applied practice, feedback, workplace use, refreshers, and 30-90 day transfer.
Evidence Maturity?35
Evidence Maturity - 35/100. Baseline, comparison, follow-up, isolation, and attribution confidence.
Future-of-Work Fit?39
Future-of-Work Fit - 39/100. Value against time, hybrid reality, accessibility, AI, and meeting load.
Fix the gaps
Field-tested exercises matched to this agenda's weakest pillars, from the exercise library.
Follow Through (16/100)
Exercises that strengthen it: Mental Toughness Workshop • WorkshopBank · 15% Solutions • WorkshopBank · Network Patches
Network Design (16/100)
Exercises that strengthen it: Fun Trust-Building Group Game for Team Connection - Izzat... · Exciting Group Trust Activity for Building Confidence... · PFP: September 2005
Personalization (33/100)
Exercises that strengthen it: Journey Mapping • WorkshopBank · Group Energiser & Perspective-Changing Exercise - Paradigm... · Photo Storytelling
Agenda Preview
The actual agenda we captured. Every block is classified by format and purpose. Open any block to see how we read it; the colored edge shows whether it is participant work, broadcast, logistics, or a showcase.
Room vs wrapper
71 percent of the 48 classified blocks put participants to work; the rest broadcast, show, or handle logistics. That mix is what drives the participation score.
Participant workBroadcastShowcaseLogistics
all eventCall for TutorialsTrainingSkill building+
Format · Participant workTrainingGuided skill building where participants practice. Counts as participant work and learning transfer.
Evidence basisParticipant work is implied by the formatInferred from format
all eventCall for WorkshopsWorkshopParticipant work+
Format · Participant workWorkshopParticipants work on a problem and produce something. The strongest signal of participation architecture.
Evidence basisParticipant work is implied by the formatInferred from format
all eventICML 2020 Call for Post-Conference WorkshopsWorkshopParticipant work+
Format · Participant workWorkshopParticipants work on a problem and produce something. The strongest signal of participation architecture.
Evidence basisParticipant work is implied by the formatInferred from format
all eventThe list of accepted workshops can be foundhere.WorkshopParticipant work+
Format · Participant workWorkshopParticipants work on a problem and produce something. The strongest signal of participation architecture.
Evidence basisParticipant work is implied by the formatInferred from format
all eventWorkshopsWorkshopParticipant work+
Format · Participant workWorkshopParticipants work on a problem and produce something. The strongest signal of participation architecture.
Evidence basisParticipant work is implied by the formatInferred from format
all eventBelow, we include the criteria by which workshop submissions will be evaluatedWorkshopParticipant work+
Format · Participant workWorkshopParticipants work on a problem and produce something. The strongest signal of participation architecture.
Evidence basisParticipant work is implied by the formatInferred from format
all event1. Fit for ICML (connections to rest of program and past workshops)WorkshopParticipant work+
Format · Participant workWorkshopParticipants work on a problem and produce something. The strongest signal of participation architecture.
Evidence basisParticipant work is implied by the formatInferred from format
all event8. Room for contributed work (posters and contributed talks)Poster sessionShowcase+
Format · ShowcasePoster sessionPresenters display work; attendees browse and ask questions. Some interaction, not structured work.
Evidence basisOutcome inferred from formatInferred from format
all event9. Open discussion/panelPanelDiscussion+
Format · BroadcastPanelExperts discuss while the audience watches. Surfaces perspective but rarely creates participant work.
Evidence basisNo participant output visible from this rowRead from source, no work signal
all eventImportant dates for workshop submissionsWorkshopParticipant work+
Format · Participant workWorkshopParticipants work on a problem and produce something. The strongest signal of participation architecture.
Evidence basisParticipant work is implied by the formatInferred from format
00:00Workshop Application Deadline: Feb 13, 2026 AOE ( 00 weeks 00 days :00 )WorkshopParticipant work+
Format · Participant workWorkshopParticipants work on a problem and produce something. The strongest signal of participation architecture.
Evidence basisParticipant work is implied by the formatInferred from format
23:59Workshop Notification: 2020-03-07 pacific ( 00 weeks 00 days :00 )WorkshopParticipant work+
Format · Participant workWorkshopParticipants work on a problem and produce something. The strongest signal of participation architecture.
Evidence basisParticipant work is implied by the formatInferred from format
all event<https://easychair.org/conferences/?conf=icml2020workshops>WorkshopParticipant work+
Format · Participant workWorkshopParticipants work on a problem and produce something. The strongest signal of participation architecture.
Evidence basisParticipant work is implied by the formatInferred from format
all eventWorkshop titleWorkshopParticipant work+
Format · Participant workWorkshopParticipants work on a problem and produce something. The strongest signal of participation architecture.
Evidence basisParticipant work is implied by the formatInferred from format
all eventA brief description of the topics to be covered, and an explanation as to why the workshop will appeal to ICML audiencesWorkshopParticipant work+
Format · Participant workWorkshopParticipants work on a problem and produce something. The strongest signal of participation architecture.
Evidence basisParticipant work is implied by the formatInferred from format
all eventA short description and rough timetable of the planned activities (talks, posters, panels)PanelDiscussion+
Format · BroadcastPanelExperts discuss while the audience watches. Surfaces perspective but rarely creates participant work.
Evidence basisNo participant output visible from this rowRead from source, no work signal
all eventA description of the history of the workshop (if it previously took place then when/where)WorkshopParticipant work+
Format · Participant workWorkshopParticipants work on a problem and produce something. The strongest signal of participation architecture.
Evidence basisParticipant work is implied by the formatInferred from format
all eventSchedule for Unregistered AttendeesUnknownUnknown+
Format · BroadcastUnknownFormat not classified from the source; treated as a broadcast block by default.
Evidence basisLowRead from source
all eventCallsUnknownUnknown+
Format · BroadcastUnknownFormat not classified from the source; treated as a broadcast block by default.
Evidence basisLowRead from source
all eventCall for TutorialsTrainingSkill Building+
Format · Participant workTrainingGuided skill building where participants practice. Counts as participant work and learning transfer.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventCall for WorkshopsWorkshopCo Creation+
Format · Participant workWorkshopParticipants work on a problem and produce something. The strongest signal of participation architecture.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventFinancial AidUnknownUnknown+
Format · BroadcastUnknownFormat not classified from the source; treated as a broadcast block by default.
Evidence basisLowRead from source
all eventVolunteer ApplicationUnknownUnknown+
Format · BroadcastUnknownFormat not classified from the source; treated as a broadcast block by default.
Evidence basisLowRead from source
all eventOrganizationUnknownUnknown+
Format · BroadcastUnknownFormat not classified from the source; treated as a broadcast block by default.
Evidence basisLowRead from source
all eventAbout ICMLUnknownUnknown+
Format · BroadcastUnknownFormat not classified from the source; treated as a broadcast block by default.
Evidence basisLowRead from source
all eventICML 2020 Call for Post-Conference WorkshopsWorkshopCo Creation+
Format · Participant workWorkshopParticipants work on a problem and produce something. The strongest signal of participation architecture.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventFollowing the ICML 2020 main conference, workshops will be held on Fri July 17th and Sat July 18th. We invite researchers interested in chairing one of these workshops to submit proposals. Workshop organizers have several responsibilities, including coordinating workshop participation and content, publicizing and providing the program in a timely manner and moderating the program throughout the workshop.WorkshopCo Creation+
Format · Participant workWorkshopParticipants work on a problem and produce something. The strongest signal of participation architecture.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventICML also solicits proposals for affinity workshops. The format and aims of these workshops should be described by the workshop organisers, following for instance the template set out by similar workshops that took place at NeurIPS in 2019 (WiML, Black in AI, LatinX in AI, Queer in AI). Affinity workshop proposals should be emailed directly to workshop-chairs@icml.cc with the subject line "Affinity workshop: [name of workshop]." The deadline for affinity workshop proposals is Feb 13, 2026 AOE. Decisions on acceptance for affinity workshops will be made in a committee appointed by the ICML board (<https://icml.cc/Conferences/2020/Board>).WorkshopCo Creation+
Format · Participant workWorkshopParticipants work on a problem and produce something. The strongest signal of participation architecture.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventThe list of accepted workshops can be foundhere.WorkshopCo Creation+
Format · Participant workWorkshopParticipants work on a problem and produce something. The strongest signal of participation architecture.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventWorkshopsWorkshopCo Creation+
Format · Participant workWorkshopParticipants work on a problem and produce something. The strongest signal of participation architecture.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventThe goal of the workshops is to provide an informal forum for researchers to discuss emerging research questions and challenges. Workshops will last for one day, with morning and afternoon sessions and free time between the sessions for individual exchange. To encourage workshop variety, all workshops will be one-day workshops.WorkshopCo Creation+
Format · Participant workWorkshopParticipants work on a problem and produce something. The strongest signal of participation architecture.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventThe workshops can be on any subject relevant to an appreciable fraction of the ICML community. Schedules should encourage lively debates, and topics should lean more towards exploring new ideas, open problems, and interdisciplinary areas, compared with the main conference. Workshops should encourage contributed content and reserve a significant portion of time for open discussion/panel discussion and posters. A diverse group of speakers is more likely to bring diverse and surprising viewpoints on a topic. As a result, we encourage workshop organizers to be cognizant of designing panels and speaker lists that are inclusive.PanelDeliberation+
Format · BroadcastPanelExperts discuss while the audience watches. Surfaces perspective but rarely creates participant work.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventBelow, we include the criteria by which workshop submissions will be evaluated:WorkshopCo Creation+
Format · Participant workWorkshopParticipants work on a problem and produce something. The strongest signal of participation architecture.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all event1. Fit for ICML (connections to rest of program and past workshops)WorkshopCo Creation+
Format · Participant workWorkshopParticipants work on a problem and produce something. The strongest signal of participation architecture.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all event8. Room for contributed work (posters and contributed talks)Poster SessionShowcase+
Format · ShowcasePoster SessionPresenters display work; attendees browse and ask questions. Some interaction, not structured work.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all event9. Open discussion/panelPanelDeliberation+
Format · BroadcastPanelExperts discuss while the audience watches. Surfaces perspective but rarely creates participant work.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventWorkshops submissions will be made through easychair. Please follow the URL below and check the required format for the application well before the proposal deadline. You may submit and update your application online right up until this deadline.WorkshopCo Creation+
Format · Participant workWorkshopParticipants work on a problem and produce something. The strongest signal of participation architecture.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventImportant dates for workshop submissions:WorkshopCo Creation+
Format · Participant workWorkshopParticipants work on a problem and produce something. The strongest signal of participation architecture.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
00:00Workshop Application Deadline: Feb 13, 2026 AOE ( 00 weeks 00 days :00 )WorkshopCo Creation+
Format · Participant workWorkshopParticipants work on a problem and produce something. The strongest signal of participation architecture.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
23:59 Workshop Notification: 2020-03-07 pacific ( 00 weeks 00 days :00 )WorkshopCo Creation+
Format · Participant workWorkshopParticipants work on a problem and produce something. The strongest signal of participation architecture.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all event<https://easychair.org/conferences/?conf=icml2020workshops>WorkshopCo Creation+
Format · Participant workWorkshopParticipants work on a problem and produce something. The strongest signal of participation architecture.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventICML does not provide travel funding for workshop speakers. In the past, some workshops have sought and received funding from external sources to bring in outside speakers. The organizers of each accepted workshop can name four individuals per day of the workshop to receive complimentary workshop registrations. In the event the conference sells out, each workshop will be given a number of guaranteed registrations for the workshop contributors, so please let us know in the application how many registrations you anticipate you will need.WorkshopCo Creation+
Format · Participant workWorkshopParticipants work on a problem and produce something. The strongest signal of participation architecture.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventWorkshop titleWorkshopCo Creation+
Format · Participant workWorkshopParticipants work on a problem and produce something. The strongest signal of participation architecture.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventA brief description of the topics to be covered, and an explanation as to why the workshop will appeal to ICML audiencesWorkshopCo Creation+
Format · Participant workWorkshopParticipants work on a problem and produce something. The strongest signal of participation architecture.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventA short description and rough timetable of the planned activities (talks, posters, panels)PanelDeliberation+
Format · BroadcastPanelExperts discuss while the audience watches. Surfaces perspective but rarely creates participant work.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventA description of the history of the workshop (if it previously took place then when/where)WorkshopCo Creation+
Format · Participant workWorkshopParticipants work on a problem and produce something. The strongest signal of participation architecture.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventSimilar past and current events at ICML and NeurIPS in the last 1-2 years, even if not organised by the present workshop organisers. New workshops are welcome to build on prior workshops, if a good case is made; completely original workshops are also welcome.Opening RemarksOrientation+
Format · BroadcastOpening RemarksFraming or welcome from the stage. Orients the room, not participatory.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventWorkshop review committeeWorkshopCo Creation+
Format · Participant workWorkshopParticipants work on a problem and produce something. The strongest signal of participation architecture.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
The Full Reading
Why It Ranks This Way +
Calibrated from GES design 43/100 and verified 42/100 with no fourth-loop cap.
Reader Takeaway. For a reader, this is a comparison record more than a model to copy: it reads as an action-oriented convening, with the strongest visible signal in participation architecture and learning transfer and the biggest open question around follow through and network design. The practical test is whether the published agenda connects the room to post-event continuation and evidence.
Strongest signals: Participation Architecture, Learning Transfer, and Problem Specificity. Weakest signals: Network Design, Follow Through, and Personalization.
How This Agenda Could Improve +
- Replace generic networking blocks with designed introductions, ask-offer exchanges, peer groups, or bridge-building rituals.
- Add named owners, dates, implementation checkpoints, and a visible post-event continuation path.
- Create role-based paths, prepared questions, tailored breakouts, or participant-specific next steps.
Fastest next move: Add named owners, dated next steps, and a visible continuation path before treating the event as outcome-ready.
Role-Specific Reading +
Sponsor lens
Look beyond exposure. Strong sponsor value would show qualified interaction, problem work, buyer learning, customer evidence, or follow-up. The practical sponsor move is to look for structured introductions, buyer-seller fit, and relationship persistence.
Designer lens
The agenda is useful as a pattern sample from icml.cc. Redesign attention should go first to the lowest-scoring pillars; in practice, turn the thinnest agenda blocks into participant work.
Executive lens
Treat the visible agenda as an operating plan. The executive move is to require owners, dates, and evidence before treating the event as strategic. If owners, proof, and follow-through are not visible, the public record does not yet prove strategic movement.
Aggregator lens
Treat the source URL as evidence, not decoration. The data-product move is to label the source boundary clearly before ranking the record before ranking or syndicating the record.
What GES Means Here +
The Gathering Effectiveness Score is a strict 0-100 public-evidence reading of the agenda across eight pillars. It rewards visible participant work, follow-through, transfer, network design, and proof mechanisms more than polish, speaker fame, attendance, or satisfaction.
Visible mechanisms: Participant work, Commitments, Network design, Learning transfer.
Evidence boundary: Scores reflect visible agenda/source evidence and should not be read as proof of causal event impact.
Limitations, Score Caps, and Review Flags +
Limitations
- No baseline measurement is visible.
Score caps
- No fourth-loop score cap applied.
Review flags
- No tracking, validation, feedback, or impact measurement found in the visible source text.
- High cleanup rate: many extracted rows were hidden or merged as fragments.
- Original category was unknown; publication category is inferred.
Is this proof the event worked? +
No. This is a strict public-evidence reading of the agenda. Proof would require baseline, comparison, follow-up, attribution, and impact evidence beyond the listing.
What should a reader inspect first? +
Start with the source URL, then compare the eight pillar scores against the agenda rows. The biggest opportunities usually sit in follow-through, evidence maturity, and participant work.
Why publish weak records? +
Weak records are part of the map. They show where public agendas still describe sessions and speakers more often than outcomes, commitments, transfer, or proof.
How should I use the rows? +
Read the agenda rows as the visible design trace: formats, purposes, and evidence labels show what the public source made inspectable, not everything that happened in the room. This is a source-grounded interpretation of the public agenda record, not a copy of the source, and not an endorsement of the event.
Embed the verified badge +
This record is in the hand-verified gold set. Copy the snippet below to embed the verified badge on your own site.
<a href="https://unitedwetransform.com/events/evt_2020_icml_self_improving_language_models_for_evolutionary_program_synthesis_a_ca_70c91a"><img src="https://unitedwetransform.com/badge/ges-verified.svg" alt="GES verified by United We Transform" height="40"></a>Where To Go Next
Compare this agenda against other Technology / AI / Startup events scored on the same eight pillars.