A NeurIPS author says this year’s reviews were unusually helpful
chhaviyadav_ · x · 2026-07-24
A NeurIPS author says this year’s reviews for their papers look unusually helpful.
- They contrast the current feedback with past experiences of sloppy or unhelpful reviews.
- The post expresses cautious optimism about the future quality of reviewing and conferences.
Related event: NeurIPS Authors Find This Year's Reviews Surprisingly Helpful(2 posts)→
More from Research
- NeurIPS-era incentives may push AI research toward safer, more repetitive work — serrjoa · 2026-07-24
- Terminal-Bench Team Launches Frontier-Bench for Agent Evaluation — BenBlaiszik · 2026-07-24
- Cisco’s open Antares SLMs tackle vulnerability localization with 350M to 3B parameters — huggingface · 2026-07-24
- BeingBeyond’s Being-M0.7 learns humanoid motion from video and beats prior methods on Unitree G1 — jiqizhixin · 2026-07-24
- Stanford Analyzes 500M Words of Statutes: CA Reporting Requirements Grew 400% — StanfordHAI · 2026-07-24
- NeurIPS Reviews Hit by AI Spam: 60% of Sampled Peer Reviews Suspected ChatGPT-Generated — graph_ · 2026-07-24