ICLR reviewer says 4/5 papers in review pile read like AI slop
berkustun · x · 2026-10-16
An ICLR reviewer (berkustun) reports that about 4 out of 5 papers in his review pile read like pure AI slop, asking whether others are seeing the same. The observation highlights growing concern over AI-generated submissions flooding academic peer review and its impact on review quality.
More from AGI Musings
- Sabine Hossenfelder fires back: academia's impact metric turned physics into a paper mill — skdh · 2026-10-16
- Researcher credits GPT for multiple accepted papers, incl. disproving Wegner's 1965 conjecture — ctjlewis · 2026-10-16
- dlwh: We optimized the legible version of our goals — and forgot the computation we meant to speed up — dlwh · 2026-10-16
- Ideas no longer have a waiting period: agents can build them as soon as they're articulable — akbirthko · 2026-10-16
- Ex-researcher: labs willing to cheat/distill ship great models faster than those building self-sufficient stacks — _aidan_clark_ · 2026-10-16
- Terry Tao reportedly still expects Riemann Hypothesis proof to be human+AI effort around 2050 — basedjensen · 2026-10-16