ICLR reviewer demands comparison with reviewer-author's own renamed workshop paper
fanconic · reddit · 2026-11-06
An ICLR submission — an improved version of the author's own workshop/arXiv paper with a renamed method and title — drew a reviewer request to compare against "a closely related paper" that is actually the author's own earlier version. The dilemma: how to establish the two are the same work without breaking double-blind anonymity. Scores are already poor, but the situation highlights how renaming methods trips up reviewer matching under anonymity rules.
More from Research
- New paper models how humans and AIs sort into firms that maximize total surplus — soumitrashukla9 · 2026-11-07
- Reorganization effect can reverse technology effect on AI-era wages, paper shows — soumitrashukla9 · 2026-11-07
- Shane Legg co-authors paper modeling how intelligence organizes into firms — soumitrashukla9 · 2026-11-07
- Meta's real-time avatars: distillation recipe cuts 120 model evals to 2, a 60x speedup for infinite video — altryne · 2026-11-07
- Free primer book derives math foundations from VAEs and diffusion to WGANs — kalyan_kpl · 2026-11-07
- Kenneth Stanley at ARC Prize summit: why open-endedness is essential to AGI but brutal to benchmark — GregKamradt · 2026-11-07