ML journal EIC responds to review disputes: email us before blasting the journal
thegautamkamath · x · 2026-10-17
Responding to an author publicly criticizing a journal's associate editor, executive editor Gautam Kamath says most AE–author disagreements are first adjudicated by email to clear up genuine misunderstandings, urging authors to try that before publicly attacking the journal over an n=1 bad experience. He admits mistakes happen but says the team tries to correct them. BlackHC pushed back, asking whether desk-rejected papers are public and suggesting AI models like Astra or Fable could adjudicate, arguing bad decisions deserve public discussion.
Related event: TMLR Review Practices Spark Public Debate After Author Criticism(4 posts)→
More from Research
- DSReg post-hoc regularization provably recovers latents without reconstruction; Nature MI paper unifies superposition theory — ninamiolane · 2026-10-17
- VaeZip: open-source codec stores VAE latent datasets 5-10x smaller with near-zero quality loss — TensorForger · 2026-10-17
- SCALLOP paper at NeurIPS 2026 trains few-step flow maps with tractable likelihood for Boltzmann generation — gottapatchemall · 2026-10-17
- GPT-6 Astra nears 100% on Columbia's SRE-Bench reverse-engineering benchmark, others below 60% — banteg · 2026-10-17
- Survive or Collapse: data gating, not rewards, drives self-play RL collapse — shangbinfeng · 2026-10-17
- Goodfire's interpretability breakthrough splits OpenAI researchers' takes — burny_tech · 2026-10-17