Skip to content
All tags

#peer-review

5 posts

Submitting to Top AI Conferences as an Independent Researcher: A Reality Check

Publishing at a top conference as an independent researcher is possible, but the numbers are harsh: single-author papers have fallen to a single-digit share, the average author count has risen from 3 to 5, and the top 20 institutions account for 35-50% of authorships. Andreas Madsen spent eight months working without pay, earned an ICLR Spotlight, and still ended up returning for a PhD. This article examines real cases, evidence of review bias, and viable paths for researchers without a large lab behind them.

ai guide AI 頂會導讀

What Happens to a Top-Conference Paper from Submission to Publication

An AI conference paper passes through anonymized submission, format screening, reviewer bidding and assignment, independent scores from 3-4 reviewers, an author rebuttal, AC/SAC/PC decisions, and camera-ready revision—a process lasting about 4-5 months. ACL-family conferences add ARR's rolling-review model, in which review comes before the author commits the paper to a venue.

Main Track, Findings, and D&B Track: Three Publication Routes at Top AI Conferences

A paper submitted to a major conference can follow three very different routes: the Main Track is the highest-threshold formal publication, Findings is the ACL family's companion venue for solid work that misses the main program, and NeurIPS created the D&B Track specifically for datasets and evaluation methodology. Their review standards, prestige, and career signals differ enough that understanding the route matters before writing the paper.

What Is an AI 'Top Conference': Why CCF, CORE and h5-index Disagree

There's no official certificate for being an 'AI top conference.' It's a community consensus built from four independent signals — CCF-A, CORE-A*, a high Google Scholar h5-index, and a low acceptance rate — and those four signals frequently disagree. ICLR being completely absent from CCF's list is a live example.

ai guide

LLM Council: Karpathy's Weekend Multi-Model Parliament — Three Stages of LLM Peer Review

LLM Council is a local Web App Andrej Karpathy built over a weekend. It sends one question to multiple LLMs simultaneously, has them anonymously peer-review each other, and then a Chairman model synthesizes a final answer. Positioned as a small tool for comparing models while studying — 99% vibe coded with no plans for long-term maintenance — but the architecture itself is a minimal ensemble LLM implementation worth studying.