Philosophy professor envisions per-reviewer AGENTS.md: AI agents extending the will of peer reviewers
JacksonKernion · x · 2026-09-21
Philosophy professor Jackson Kernion sketches LLM-assisted peer review: reviewers can and should be opinionated. He imagines each maintaining their own AGENTS.md, skills and files, with automated review as a starting point — per-reviewer defaults could even be generated from past review exchanges.
The premise: if you can articulate what you look for in articles, with examples and reasons, agents can extend the reviewer's will. He rejects a particularist view that each philosophical work must be evaluated on its own terms. He concedes the practicalities are very hard, possibly impossible — more likely individuals become "super-reviewers," or publishing stays like art curation. Context: a journal editor told him desk-rejecting bad papers is easy; finding good reviewers is the hard part.
Related event: Philosopher Proposes Personalized Review Agents via AGENTS.md(2 posts)→
More from AGI Musings
- Post-singularity optimism: by the 2030s almost everyone will be "rich" — Dr_Singularity · 2026-09-21
- Fact-checking Andrew Yang's claim about self-replicating AI agents — SpiritRealistic8174 · 2026-09-21
- Founder feedback now goes to Claude and GPT, fueling the solo founder boom — brezina · 2026-09-21
- The 'moral singularity' argument: unknowable ASI values rule out 50-50 optimism — danfaggella · 2026-09-21
- ToKTeacher: AI Speeds Error Correction, So We Must Solve Problems Much Faster — burny_tech · 2026-09-21
- Nate So8res breaks 'How would AI kill us?' into three distinct questions — ESYudkowsky · 2026-09-21