Sign inGet started
Paper · arXiv

Position: Want Better ML Reviews? Stop Asking Nicely and Start Incentivizing with a Credit System

With soaring submission counts, stricter reciprocal review policies, widespread adoption of platforms like OpenReview, and without the offsetting pressure of publication fees, the machine learning (ML) community has one of the largest scholarly presences among all scientific fields. And yet, \textbf{almost \textit{everyone} has \textit{many} unpleasant things to share about their review experience.} Worse, there is little public space to seriously discuss, let alone debate, what makes a review system effective or how it might be improved.\quad In this position paper, we expand our discussion from two core problems: \textit{How can we reasonably limit submission volume?} and \textit{How ca...

AuthorsShaochen Zhong
Primary categorycs.AI
Published5 June 2026
Last updated at source5 June 2026
cs.AIcs.DL
Embed this entry
<iframe src="https://silytics.si/embed/item/db0919af-0f22-49b5-9fc3-38f4ca87180b" width="420" height="190" style="border:0" loading="lazy" title="Silytics entry"></iframe>

Free, no tracking. More about feeds and embeds.

Silytics shows public metadata from arXiv and links to the original. Information may be incomplete or out of date. Last refreshed 17 October 2026. Licenses and terms of the original apply to the work itself. Not financial, legal or professional advice.