NeurIPS 2026 AI-generated reviews [D]
Mirrored from r/MachineLearning for archival readability. Support the source by reading on the original site.
I'm really confused about what the point of the prompt injection was (speaking as an author). Is it just a study? I would really prefer that they took action against the AI-generated reviews. Obviously, we cannot assume that the reviewers were copy-pasting the output from the LLM without having given it any look at all, but in some cases that does look to be the case. In fact, in some cases the meta-reviewer seems to have also largely used LLMs. What exactly is the consequence here for using an LLM for reviewing?
[link] [comments]
More from r/MachineLearning
-
A collision-entropy floor for watermark/retrieval AI-text detection. Looking for a sanity check before I take this further [D]
Aug 14
-
Are supervised and unsupervised learning still relevant today? [D]
Aug 14
-
TMLR Relevance and Prestige [D]
Aug 13
-
Reproducible canvas-aligned low-level patterns in somerandomllm-generated images and their possible relation to iterative editing artifacts [D]
Aug 13
Discussion (0)
Sign in to join the discussion. Free account, 30 seconds — email code or GitHub.
Sign in →No comments yet. Sign in and be the first to say something.