Post

Clément Canonne
@ccanonne.github.io

One solution: normalize desk-rejections. After a fast first assessment, papers are either desk-rejected, or go to full review. The current conf peer-review system has desk rejects as the exception, as it relied on self-selection prior to submission and small numbers. Neither of these hold anymore.

Andrew Cullen@adrcullen.bsky.social

Peer review relies upon reciprocity - I'll check your work, knowing that you'd do the same for me. Your investment in writing deserves my investment in reading. However AI generated theory papers are really testing my patience, and my peer reviewed faith. #ICLR

Clément Canonne
@ccanonne.github.io

It does sting to get a desk rejection after one week. What else does? Waiting 4+ months for the same rejection, with a 2-line review (or, worse, an entirely AI-generated one). If you're not going to engage with the paper, make it quick.

0 reposts16 likes

No replies yet.