NeurIPS review batch is alleged to contain 60% ChatGPT-written reviews and 20% AI-written papers
nanjiang_cs · x · 2026-07-24
A thread says NeurIPS appears to have a large share of ChatGPT-generated reviews and even some ChatGPT-generated papers in one batch, raising the question of whether human-written reviews and meta-reviews are still worth the effort.
- One user claims that in a batch of 30 submissions, roughly 60% of reviews looked ChatGPT-generated.
- The same batch allegedly had about 20% ChatGPT-generated papers.
- The post frames this as a broader integrity problem for academic reviewing, not just a one-off complaint.
Related event: NeurIPS Reviews and Submissions Flagged as AI-Generated(2 posts)→
More from Research
- AI slop is already clogging PR review and weakening the credit system behind science — rbhar90 · 2026-07-27
- ICML 2026 oral paper replication scores stay middling after a stricter re-scoring — profjamesevans · 2026-07-27
- Long-running agents will need immutable event logs, this thread argues — sebpaquet · 2026-07-27
- Seed IQ navigates Doom II, prompting questions about benchmarks beyond ARC-AGI — Fit_Transition8824 · 2026-07-27
- Agentic Data Science in Practice: Agents Write Code but Answer Wrong Questions — hugobowne · 2026-07-27
- A concise canon of foundational papers in ML, systems, NLP, speech, and audio — deliprao · 2026-07-27