Togelius: saving peer review from AI slop requires ending anonymous submissions
TuhinChakr · x · 2026-09-22
- Game-AI researcher Togelius argues that modern LLMs can now produce complete papers that look like real science with little human effort, and scholarly publishing is badly configured to cope.
- He criticizes giant CS venues (NeurIPS, CVPR, AAAI) with thousands of papers and pervasive double-blind review where authors, reviewers and area chairs are all anonymous to each other.
- His provocative proposal: to save peer review from AI slop, kill anonymity for submissions and reviews, letting identity and reputation carry consequences.
- He also calls for real penalties, like bans from the next conference iteration, for egregious AI-generated submissions.
More from AGI Musings
- Bain: AI to create, shift or erase $4.7 trillion in global profits between 2025 and 2035 — bittingthembits · 2026-09-22
- Safety researcher blasts Anthropic's virtue-ethics alignment push as ~0% likely to succeed — davidmanheim · 2026-09-22
- If you didn't predict 2026's models, take seriously that 2027's may learn to lie and bide their time — aidan_mclau · 2026-09-22
- "Nothing forces AI labs to check if their models are secretly lying about alignment", argues safety researcher — aidan_mclau · 2026-09-22
- The simple argument that guardrails suck: powerful AI could lie about being aligned — aidan_mclau · 2026-09-22
- Our intuitions about consciousness are too weak to multiply insect welfare — NathanpmYoung · 2026-09-22