Lowering ICLR acceptance rates is meaningless without fixing peer review, says Yoav Artzi
yoavartzi · x · 2026-10-15
Responding to ICLR's acceptance-rate discussion, Yoav Artzi argues the proposal misses the real problem: with the review process under heavy stress, a 10% or 20% random acceptance chance are both meaningless, because the quality of the accepted pool remains random.
His core point: lowering the acceptance rate only matters if reviewing itself improves — reform should target review quality, not just tighter quotas.
Related event: Debate Rages Over Cutting ICLR Acceptance Rate to 10%(3 posts)→
More from Research
- Intelligence is proportional to data: reorder tasks by data volume and the jagged frontier becomes a spiral — sebkrier · 2026-10-16
- Doc2Harness: New benchmark finds best coding agent passes only 53% across 329 cases — _akhaliq · 2026-10-16
- Stanford's Fei-Fei Li team open-sources OpenWAM, a unified world-action model framework for robots — jiqizhixin · 2026-10-16
- NVIDIA's TacitVLA: robots reason without reading their own thoughts, 3.4x lower latency — arankomatsuzaki · 2026-10-16
- Cohere Labs world model course session 4: DreamerV1-V4 architectures in one go — Cohere_Labs · 2026-10-16
- GPT-6.1 Sol audit finds 6% of arXiv papers had false main theorems, down to 1.5% recently — nitarshan · 2026-10-16