Summary
An author comparing their experiences with peer review at major AI venues like TMLR, ICML, and ICLR suggests that TMLR offers significantly more reliable and "on point" reviews. In contrast, ICML reviews are often perceived as rushed, low confidence, or overly hostile. This anecdotal observation raises concerns about the quality and fairness of the review process at prominent conferences.
Continue Reading
Explore related coverage about community news and adjacent AI developments: [r/ML] [D] MYTHOS-INVERSION STRUCTURAL AUDIT, [r/LocalLLaMA] karpathy / autoresearch, [r/ML] [R] Agentic AI and Occupational Displacement: A Multi-Regional Task Exposure Analysis (236 occupations, 5 US metros), [r/ML] Building behavioural response models of public figures using Brain scan data (Predict their next move using psychological modelling) [P].
Related Articles
- [r/ML] [D] MYTHOS-INVERSION STRUCTURAL AUDIT
March 29, 2026
- [r/LocalLLaMA] karpathy / autoresearch
March 10, 2026
- [r/ML] [R] Agentic AI and Occupational Displacement: A Multi-Regional Task Exposure Analysis (236 occupations, 5 US metros)
April 7, 2026
- [r/ML] Building behavioural response models of public figures using Brain scan data (Predict their next move using psychological modelling) [P]
April 5, 2026
Comments
Sign in to leave a comment.