Workshop paper expanded for ICLR flagged by reviewer over novelty; Fleuret says escalate to the AC
francoisfleuret · x · 2026-11-07
A publishing dilemma: the team published paper A at a workshop, co-wrote paper B on arXiv, then updated A and submitted it to ICLR — only to have a reviewer call out claimed novelty for things already in B. The authors note those contributions originated in their own workshop version and appeared in B because they co-authored it.
François Fleuret's terse reply — "Area Chair?" — suggests escalating the provenance explanation to the AC rather than accepting the reviewer's framing. The thread highlights the gray zone of novelty claims when workshop, arXiv and conference versions coexist.
More from Research
- Regularization amplifies subliminal learning instead of blocking hidden biases, thread finds — AdtRaghunathan · 2026-11-07
- Your LLM Is Secretly a Reward Model: Revisiting Stanford's DPO Paper — dotey · 2026-11-07
- RareDiseaseBench debuts: 35 reconstructed rare disease cases test AI diagnostic agents — kenbwork · 2026-11-07
- With ETH Refuted, GNN Chains Tackle the Still-Hard Graph Alignment Problem — marc_lelarge · 2026-11-07
- CMU L3 Lab CUA Week: GPT-6 Astra Passes Only 9% of Real-Time Minigames — dan_fried · 2026-11-07
- NYU's Witnesses lets researchers prove what data their AI training used, no rerun needed — pratyusha_PS · 2026-11-07