Why ML Peer Reviews Always Need Chasing
thegautamkamath · x · 2026-07-19
The author recalls taking reviewing very seriously during their early PhD years, noting that in theoretical computer science, one could generally expect senior researchers to provide detailed feedback.
However, in the machine learning field, reviewing often feels like "forced homework." Without constant follow-ups and reminders, many reviewers simply fail to complete their reviews on schedule.
Related event: Researchers Express Frustration Over ML Peer Review Ecosystem(2 posts)→
More from Research
- Researchers identify "Forking": train loss falls while validation loss turns up — ZimingLiu11 · 2026-10-26
- Google DeepMind pilots world's first double-blind evaluations for frontier models — scychan_brains · 2026-10-26
- Rewriting scaling law study: optimal synthetic data share rises from 10% to 32% with compute — heghbalz · 2026-10-26
- FLASH: GPU-native deformable sim learns cloth folding in minutes on one RTX 5090 — ChongZzZhang · 2026-10-26
- LEMON: zero-shot LLM misbehavior monitor flags hallucinations from attention maps — yoavartzi · 2026-10-26
- Behind the EMNLP keynote: LMs as simulated learners to generate child language acquisition hypotheses — najoungkim · 2026-10-26