Get the latest tech news
Academics accuse AI startups of co-opting peer review for publicity
Academics are accusing several AI startups of co-opting the peer review process at ICLR, a long-running AI conference, for publicity.
“All these AI scientist papers are using peer-reviewed venues as their human evals, but no one consented to providing this free labor,” wrote Prithviraj Ammanabrolu, an assistant computer science professor at UC San Diego, in an X post. Ashwinee Panda, a postdoctoral fellow at the University of Maryland, said in an X post that submitting AI-generated papers without giving workshop organizers the right to refuse them showed a “lack of respect for human reviewers’ time.” Alexander Doria, the co-founder of AI startup Pleias, said that the raft of surreptitious synthetic ICLR submissions pointed to the need for a “regulated company/public agency” to perform “high-quality” AI-generated study evaluations for a price.
Or read this on TechCrunch
