NeurIPS desk-rejected 178 papers as AI-generated — then the detector flagged the chairs' own papers too
CSProfKGD · x · 2026-09-19
The NeurIPS Position Paper Track screened all 969 submissions through AI-detection tool Pangram in June 2026, desk-rejecting 178 papers (18.4%) with no appeal and demanding version histories from 123 more.
Key controversies:
- Desk-rejected author Sergey Berezin ran the track chairs' own recent papers through the same detector: scores of 24%, 36%, 45% and 69%
- The tool used was Pangram 3.3.2; the supposedly more accurate Pangram 4 shipped a month after decisions were made
- Earlier reporting: 42.7% of submissions initially scored 90-100% AI-generated and 273 hit 100%; narrowing the text window alone dropped the flag rate by 70%
With ICLR reportedly seeing 50k submissions, AI-era review scale and detector reliability are becoming industry-wide problems.
More from AGI Musings
- Agents' bottleneck isn't intelligence but goal commitment — and that's good for alignment — mimi10v3 · 2026-11-12
- Google Cloud survey: 78% say legacy enterprise vendors may not lead the AI era — rseroter · 2026-11-12
- Safety researchers blast OpenAI/Anthropic plan: automating alignment research with possibly misaligned AI — trevposts · 2026-11-12
- NYT essay: resisting Big Tech and AI takes collective action, not willpower — TuhinChakr · 2026-11-12
- Ethan Mollick: 'talk to your documents' RAG solutions already feel dated — emollick · 2026-11-12
- Anthropic's pitch hasn't changed in 5 years: 'AI is winner-take-all, we will build god' — menhguin · 2026-11-12