ICLR hits 60,000 submissions as MIT professor warns peer review is broken
CSProfKGD · x · 2026-09-22
MIT professor Phillip Torr flags ICLR's 60,000 submissions and questions what it means for AI and science: ML reviews were always noisy, good reviewers are now impossible to find, and the reciprocal review rule is "badly broken." Oral exams won't scale, and AI reviewing would just mean AI-generated papers reviewed by AIs. As ICCV'29 General Chair, he's asking for solutions.
Related event: ICLR 2027 Surpasses 60K Submissions, Sparking Reform Debate(7 posts)→
More from Research
- OpenAI's new model claims Navier–Stokes and 100+ open math problems in weeks — Dr_Singularity · 2026-09-22
- Limite trained from scratch on under 300B math-heavy tokens, nanogpt-speedrun-inspired — tensorqt · 2026-09-22
- OpenAI says model trained just 24 days ago has solved 100+ longstanding math problems — gaganghotra_ · 2026-09-22
- Forging 1024-bit RSA signatures in nearly SNFS time, sans factoring N — matthew_d_green · 2026-09-22
- Multi-turn evaluation changes what it means to pass the Turing test — CShorten30 · 2026-09-22
- Paradigma's 1B model scores 74.25% on BeyondAIME, trained on under 300B tokens — tensorqt · 2026-09-22