FULL STORY
Taming AI Paper Spam: From Review Debate to Concrete Fixes
Amid a flood of AI-generated low-quality submissions, reviewer tallinzen moved from calling for mass desk rejects to proposing public OpenReview rejection records and submission bans.
2026-10-15 ~ 2026-10-16 · 2 episodes · 4 posts
Episode 1 · Researchers Urge Mass Desk Rejection as AI-Generated Papers Flood Peer Review (2026-10-15, 2 posts)
Amid a flood of AI-generated paper submissions, experienced reviewer tallinzen argues conferences should skip acceptance-rate targets and desk-reject low-quality submissions, which can be identified in 15-20 minutes.
- Reviewer: skip acceptance-rate targets, just desk reject en masse — tallinzen · 2026-10-15
- AI slop submissions strain peer review: experienced reviewers need just 15-20 minutes to spot them — yoavartzi · 2026-10-16
Episode 2 · Researcher Proposes Public Desk-Rejection Records and Submission Bans on OpenReview (2026-10-16, 2 posts)
Researcher tallinzen proposed showing desk-rejection records publicly on OpenReview and imposing month-long submission bans on authors with repeated desk rejections, sparking discussion on peer-review reform.
- Researchers propose public desk-rejection records and submission bans on OpenReview — tallinzen · 2026-10-16
- Researchers propose publicly logging OpenReview desk rejections with submission bans — ChenhaoTan · 2026-10-16