Simon Pepin Lehalleur

Every single review I have handled at NeurIPS as an AC is **much worse** than a well executed AI review. By "much worse" I do not mean 20% or 50%. I mean a factor of about 10-100. At least - 10x more mathematical issues are caught, - 10x more missing key citations are caught, - 10x more novelty claims are invalidated with evidence, - 10x more issues with the experiments are observed, - 10x more typos and grammatical issues are fixed, - 10x more inconsistencies are found, and so on. In many cases I have handled over the last 10 years, the human reviews are so bad in comparison that the improvement factor is closer to 100. (The best human reviews I received over the years are worse than an AI review I can generate today, but still entirely good enough to make the correct decision. On the other hand, an AI review is often an almost comprehensive summary of all key issues --- something a human almost never has time to deliver --- and such feedback is immensely useful to the authors) At this point, we would be much better to just 1) give one very thorough ChatGPT review to all submitted papers (I am mainly talking about my fields - optimization, AI, machine learning), automatically, and 2) keep asking for a revision or two (to keep the duration of the process within some bounds) until the number of issues decreases to an extent when the AI reviewer is satisfied, in a given time-frame (eg, 1 month). 3) At that point, a human AC can make a decision (to keep an eye on this all should anything go wrong). The role of the AC would be merely to observe and manage the process, and make a final decision, based on the trajectory of the revisions. I can't believe I am saying this -- AI reviews were a nonsense idea even a year ago. The current AI reviews are super-human.

I’m releasing my Pokémon equivalent of The Odyssey today… it’s our biggest video ever. We’ve spent 6 months & millions of dollars making this movie, hope you enjoy

Conjecture that every complex topological vector bundle on CP^n is algebraic is false. GPT-5.6 Pro found me an example on CP^5 that is not only non-algebraizable, but also with no motivic lift. This also disproves a more recent conjecture by Asok-Fasel-Hopkin.

Joe Rogan might be in real danger after historical investigator Timothy Alberino just leaked classified Pentagon information about a group of Marines who were all killed by a single unarmed 1,100 pound humanoid in Afghanistan: ALBERINO: “A team of Marines in Afghanistan stormed a cave hunting for Taliban, but they were instead met by an enormous giant who killed them all.” ROGAN: “WHAT?! That’s the craziest thing I’ve ever heard. So the giant just got away?” ALBERINO: “They then deployed another unit to go look for that team. When the team got to the cave that giant was in the middle of eating the dead soldiers.” ROGAN: “You can’t be serious. So what did the giant do to this unit?” ALBERINO: “This new unit went in fully prepared so they were able to successfully kill the giant.” ROGAN: “Did you ever try to find records of who was there and what casualties were reported?” ALBERINO: “It’s very difficult to get that kind of information.” ROGAN: “I’m sure.” ALBERINO: “The Pentagon released a bizarre statement years ago saying that the giant Kandahar incident never happened.” ROGAN: “The Pentagon actually said this? That makes me feel sketchy.” ALBERINO: “The pilot told me they weighed the giant before loading him on the plane. He got measured at 10-12 feet tall and 1,100 pounds.” ROGAN: “1,100 pounds? That can’t be a human. Who else have you spoken with about this?” ALBERINO: “I asked a commander about the Kandahar giant. The blood rushed out of his face and he points to his phone because he thought they might be listening. His wife then whispered to me that he’s not allowed to talk about that.” ROGAN: “Ohhh my god.” ALBERINO: “What I later learned is that it’s not the single giant of Kandahar, it’s the GIANTS. There’s more than one.”

The Jacobian conjecture problem and solution, presented visually. For people like me who don't read math jargon.

The fact that nobody names their kids Achilles, Menelaus, Agamemnon or Odysseus these days, but here are tons of Hectors around says a lot.