AI paper submissions are up 10x, but qualified reviewers may have only tripled
srchvrs · x · 2026-08-04
A discussion about AI conference reviewing argues that review quality is being hurt by a mismatch between submission growth and qualified reviewers.
- The reply says many people complain about poor reviews and ignored rebuttals, but disappear when it is their turn to review.
- It argues that current ARR policies incentivize people who are new to AI research to review papers that used to require a senior PhD-level understanding.
- Submissions are said to have grown 10x, while the number of qualified reviewers has likely only grown 2–3x, perhaps 5x at best.
More from Research
- Universal forgery attack breaks Chinese PQC signature Origami using only the public key — matthew_d_green · 2026-10-16
- How do you attribute agent gains: model training or infrastructure? — jrxna · 2026-10-16
- First-ever paper on multi-agent swarm safety lands NeurIPS spotlight — LauraRuis · 2026-10-16
- EDEN: anchored embedding noise boosts RLVR exploration beyond policy rollouts — Daijiao Liu · 2026-10-16
- Autonomous vehicle demo shows car reversing to break narrow-road deadlock, with a robotic arm to shift gears — sanjeevs_iitr · 2026-10-16
- Yoav Artzi on peer review: paper flooding still pays off as review system strains under load — yoavartzi · 2026-10-16