Researchers debate academia's core failures: eval-obsessed reviewing, slow cycles and slop submissions
moarbugs · x · 2026-09-18
In a thread with Ranjit Jhala, researcher moarbugs lays out three structural problems with academic conferences (SE as the canary): 1) overemphasis on evals and methodology over significance, accepting legit-looking but reality-disconnected papers and rejecting those without the traditional "number-go-up" format; 2) long cycles making talks outdated by presentation time — publication and presentation should be decoupled; 3) slop submissions and reviews causing content overload, fixable via rate-limited authorship and open reviewing platforms. Jhala worries SE is the canary in the coal mine.
Related event: Researcher Lists Three Big Problems With Academic Conferences(3 posts)→
More from Research
- Idea: replicate JEV-style probability estimates via softmax of LLM logprobs — ngxson · 2026-09-18
- msign Is Wrong for Full-Rank SVD Power Iteration, but Correct for Top-k Subspaces — YouJiacheng · 2026-09-18
- Human Organoids Fill 91.9% of Cortex in Engineered Mice, Nature Paper Reports — ctjlewis · 2026-09-18
- Lambda's EdiVal-Agent uses an agentic judge for image editing evals, hitting 81.3% human agreement — TheZachMueller · 2026-09-18
- Tahoe-100M cell state dataset published in Cell, downloaded 600K+ times — anshulkundaje · 2026-09-18
- AlphaGenome author pushes back: variant prioritization gains are real contributions — anshulkundaje · 2026-09-18