Analyzing the LLM Slop Trend in Submissions
NeelNanda5 · x · 2026-07-15
The author mentions having organized 3 mech interp workshops, inadvertently accumulating a dataset of submissions perfect for analyzing the upward trend of "LLM slop".
@andyarditi's analysis focuses on:
- The actual volume of AI slop accepted
- How this situation has evolved since 2024
- Whether the review process is genuinely "all noise"
The author emphasizes that this is a post-hoc analysis and that Pangram was not used when making their decisions.
Related event: Data Confirms Worsening LLM Slop in Academic Submissions(2 posts)→
More from Research
- Diamandis: AI Cancer Navigator and $100 Genome Sequencing Close the Care Gap — PeterDiamandis · 2026-10-27
- EMNLP Oral: training-free Nexus Sampling cuts KV-cache memory 10x; OpenResearcher tops BrowseComp-Plus at 54.8% — yuz9yuz · 2026-10-27
- ICML 2026 position paper: LLM 'thinking traces' are a harmful anthropomorphism — rao2z · 2026-10-27
- Forking gap follows a power law in context frequency; masking rare n-grams shrinks it — ZimingLiu11 · 2026-10-27
- How forking happens: n-gram tables split logits into non-interacting subspaces — ZimingLiu11 · 2026-10-27
- The best LoRA explainer video yet: rank constraints meet intrinsic dimension — sophiamyang · 2026-10-27