ARR reviewers caught using AI for peer reviews amid two-week compulsory deadlines
tallinzen · x · 2026-09-09
Kanishka Misra notes that ARR reviewers who use AI to generate reviews while claiming they didn't may not realize area and senior area chairs can still see their names.
Quoting that post, a reviewer responds that while he won't use AI for reviews, the quality would be higher if he'd had more than two weeks — most of which he spent traveling. He says he'd normally declare unavailability but compulsory reviewing leaves no such option, and asks @ReviewAcl to at least extend deadlines in the future.
The exchange highlights both the gray zone of AI use in peer review and the burnout-driven burden of forced reviewing.
More from AGI Musings
- Nikita Bier: AI-generated renovation plans are basically construction-ready now — aarthir · 2026-09-09
- Report: coding agents boost code output but gains shrink sharply before production — omarsar0 · 2026-09-09
- The AI goalpost keeps moving: from can't multiply to IMO gold, still not enough — IgorCarron · 2026-09-09
- The future is unimaginable: AI can't contemplate, so good goals must be discovered by humans — sebkrier · 2026-09-09
- Local Bad Behavior In RL Doesn't Produce Emergent Misalignment, Per Hacker-Opus — 1a3orn · 2026-09-09
- A 10-Minute Method to Calculate Your 'AI Exposure' — and Why the Unmarked Tasks Matter Most — ravikantagrawal · 2026-09-09