Researcher: desk rejects are routine at journals; conference peer review is a major advantage
avt_im · x · 2026-10-17
In a debate on NeurIPS review quality, researcher avtim argues desk rejects are common at journals — papers of his desk-rejected by JRSS-B easily made it into JMLR. He concludes that having every paper receive an actual review is a major advantage of the conference system, pushing back on using LLMs to adjudicate review decisions.
More from Research
- Mercor Post-Trains Nemotron with Targeted APEX Data, Gains Across Law, SWE, Accounting — NVIDIAAI · 2026-10-17
- Post-training Nemotron with Era data for $609 matches frontier models at 88.9%, 27x cheaper per correct answer — NVIDIAAI · 2026-10-17
- Researchers propose a Google Scholar-like index for async LLM agents that scales — shangbinfeng · 2026-10-17
- Oscillator Language Models paper: phase-coded Kuramoto dynamics for language modeling — burny_tech · 2026-10-17
- Vals Science Index: OpenAI Models Lead Overall, but No Model Sweeps Every Science Discipline — BenBlaiszik · 2026-10-17
- First-author PhD paper frames AI text detection as continual learning, accepted at NeurIPS 2026 — lucy3_li · 2026-10-17