How's ICLR reviewing going for you? Any observations? [D]
Summary
A discussion post asking the community about their experience reviewing submissions for ICLR, focusing on the rising volume of AI-generated papers and the growing difficulty of detecting AI-written text and 'slop' submissions in OpenReview.
Similar Articles
Can conference review infrastructure keep up with the increasing volume of NON-SLOP research due to agentic tools? [D]
The article discusses how AI tools are accelerating genuine ML research, leading to increased submissions at conferences like ICLR 2027, and questions whether review infrastructure can keep up, proposing that reviewers might need to use AI tools as well.
What is wrong with AI writing - ICLR edition [D]
A Hacker News discussion帖吐槽 ICLR 审稿中泛滥的晦涩 AI 写作，并附上一段匿名论文的典型模糊表述，呼吁社区讨论如何在不简单指责“AI 写作”的前提下批评这类糟糕行文的实质问题。
Concerns about the ICLR review policy [D]
The author expresses concerns about ICLR's review policy that requires individuals to serve as reviewers if they appear on 3 or more papers, regardless of their qualifications.
NeurIPS 2026 AI-generated reviews [D]
Discussion about the use of AI-generated reviews at NeurIPS 2026, including concerns over prompt injection and lack of consequences for reviewers using LLMs without proper oversight.
@peterbhase: I feel quite sad from doing my ICLR reviews today. It appears that the grim reaper of AI has come for scientific publis…
研究者Peter Henderson在ICLR审稿中表达对AI冲击学术同行评审体系的担忧，指出大量疑似AI生成的投稿正导致审稿质量下降与评审系统的死亡螺旋。