NeurIPS ACs debate desk-reject quotas: small paper piles make quotas statistically unfair
plopesresearch · x · 2026-10-05
Researcher plopesresearch argues on X that forcing ACs to meet desk-reject quotas is problematic for small review piles (10 papers), since the pile could statistically be all-strong and rejecting half hurts the community. At larger scale (hundreds of papers) it may be fine: a first pass of 50 papers is acceptable, but after that pass ACs shouldn't face further rejection quotas.
Related event: Area Chair Proposes Desk-Rejecting ~50% of Submissions, Sparking Debate(6 posts)→
More from Research
- Frank Nielsen's free textbook: An Elementary Introduction to Information Geometry — FrnkNlsn · 2026-10-05
- Microsoft's ThinkingBox: grade agents by database changes, not their words — SergioPaniego · 2026-10-05
- Quanta: Is AI the End of Math As We Know It? — littmath · 2026-10-05
- First-of-Kind RCT: GPT-4o Respiratory Chatbot Beats Web Search for Layperson Diagnosis — EricTopol · 2026-10-05
- Local sparsity enables unsupervised LLM safety detection, new NeurIPS paper shows — breadli428 · 2026-10-05
- Eric Topol highlights major RAS pancreatic cancer advance, MYC next in line — EricTopol · 2026-10-05