NeurIPS papers that fit no community often get the harshest reviews
andrewgwils · x · 2026-07-25
NeurIPS review quality can vary sharply depending on which subcommunity a paper is assigned to, and papers that do not clearly fit any community often fare the worst.
The quote argues that these “no-man’s-land” papers are precisely the ones research communities most need, because they are often torn apart by confident misunderstanding rather than evaluated on their actual merit.
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