NeurIPS 2026 Reviewer: AI-Generated Rebuttals (and Paper) [D]
Summary
A NeurIPS reviewer reports encountering a paper and rebuttals that appear entirely LLM-generated, expressing frustration and seeking advice on how to evaluate such submissions.
Similar Articles
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.
NeurIPS reviewers not engaging [D]
A user seeks advice on how to nudge NeurIPS reviewers to engage with rebuttals, suggesting possible penalties for non-engagement.
NeurIPS 2026: If the rebuttal addresses your concern, please raise your score [D]
An opinion piece urging NeurIPS reviewers to raise scores when rebuttals address their stated concerns, regardless of personal taste, sparking discussion about the review process.
More Than Mimicking Reviewers: Evaluating LLMs for Pre-Submission Peer Review
This paper evaluates LLM systems for pre-submission peer review, demonstrating that broad generation can recover most historical review issues but compressing them into a short report is challenging, with implications for AI-assisted research feedback.
neurips 2026: ACs and reviewers have disappeared [D]
Authors of a NeurIPS 2026 submission report that reviewers and ACs went silent after they submitted their rebuttal early via the Rebuttal button, with no notifications triggered for either side, leaving them anxious with only a day left in the discussion period.