AI Slop Papers Make Reviewing Easier: Only 25-50% Deserve Careful Reads
tallinzen · x · 2026-09-17
tallinzen observes that AI slop papers have made ML conference reviewing easier on average, since many submissions quickly reveal they don't merit careful review — reviewers really only need to read 25-50% of their batch. The quoted context: Nihar Shah ran a heroic TMLR experiment, spending 20-25 hours over two weeks interviewing authors of seemingly low-quality submissions, confirming that these authors have no idea what is going on in their own papers.
More from Research
- Common Crawl puts crawl archives on Hugging Face Storage Bucket, with a getting-started guide — vanstriendaniel · 2026-09-17
- TMLR editor interviewed authors of low-quality submissions: they had no idea what their papers said — TuhinChakr · 2026-09-17
- Schmidhuber: I published the first concrete RSI algorithms in 1987, now RSI is driving AI's future — SchmidhuberAI · 2026-09-17
- FLYPITCH uses a fruit fly connectome to generate delightfully insane WIRED story pitches — willknight · 2026-09-17
- Protein Models ESMC and ESMFold2 Land on HuggingFace with NVIDIA-Built Fused Triton Kernels — AllThingsApx · 2026-09-17
- Evals shouldn't be skewed by infra: why turn limits break on sub-agents — langstonnashold · 2026-09-17