Global AI News Aggregator
By
–
1/4 Want to build a computer inside a transformer? Given the wide interest in our project, we are releasing the code and the weights so that others can build on our construction. [Translated from EN to English]
→ View original post on X — @thegautamkamath, 2026-03-25 20:50 UTC
By
–
As co-comms chair of ICML 2026 (w @kgorman), I'm super proud of how transparent we've been able to be on all of the (bold!) decisions made. Thanks to all the organizers (esp PC chairs) for being aligned on this. The community deserves to understand these important decisions ICML Conference (@icmlconf) To ensure compliance w peer-review policies, ICML has removed 795 reviews (1% of total) by reviewers who used LLMs when they explicitly agreed to not. Consequently, 497 papers (2% of all submissions) of these (reciprocal) reviewers have been desk rejected Details in blog post 👇 — https://nitter.net/icmlconf/status/2034279558598242523#m
→ View original post on X — @thegautamkamath, 2026-03-23 13:54 UTC
By
–
ICML workshop acceptance rate was 18% this year (due to space constraints), with submissions up 60% from last year. That meant many very strong, high-quality workshop proposals could not be accepted. (1/) @neu_rips @fredahshi
→ View original post on X — @thegautamkamath, 2026-03-21 14:06 UTC
By
–
So true. Of the 5 papers I've read so far, I think 4 of them are clear accepts! For what other conference will you find such consistent submission quality? Another sad thing: I actually want to read these papers in full! But given 7 papers to review, there's not enough time… Francesco Orabona (@bremen79) Reviewing for COLT is sad because the majority of the papers are: – correct&rigorous – interesting – solving challenging problems So, everything is so much better than the average NeurIPS/ICML/ICLR submission. Yet, we reject ~70% of them because these are the rules of the game — https://nitter.net/bremen79/status/2033858050138718362#m
→ View original post on X — @thegautamkamath, 2026-03-21 00:23 UTC
By
–
Here's a minimal tweak that comes at almost no cost: reveal the authors of rejected submissions to reviewers after decisions have been made. (Larger tweaks include single blind, the ICLR-style public reveal, etc.)
→ View original post on X — @thegautamkamath, 2026-03-20 20:30 UTC
By
–
Happy Ugadi, Nowruz, and Eid al-Fitr! All three are on March 19 and 20 this year, despite being determined by lunisolar, solar, and lunar calendars. Gemini tells me this alignment happens once every ~300 years.
→ View original post on X — @thegautamkamath, 2026-03-20 16:31 UTC
By
–
To ensure compliance w peer-review policies, ICML has removed 795 reviews (1% of total) by reviewers who used LLMs when they explicitly agreed to not. Consequently, 497 papers (2% of all submissions) of these (reciprocal) reviewers have been desk rejected Details in blog post 👇
→ View original post on X — @thegautamkamath, 2026-03-18 14:43 UTC
By
–
Some RPGs have hardcore mode: if your character dies, it gets deleted. Conferences should have a hardcore track: if your paper is rejected, you can't resubmit it, your entire codebase is deleted, etc. How much better would these submissions be?
By
–
One of my biggest annoyances of ML culture: not including all relevant parties (e.g., all authors of a paper) on emails.
By
–
Happy new year! Guest post on my blog by Abhradeep Thakurta, featuring his perspective on interviewing/hiring for faculty and industry research positions in CS/ML. I add some of my own comments at the end. Comments and perspectives welcome!