Shashank Agnihotri

277 posts

Shashank Agnihotri banner
Shashank Agnihotri

Shashank Agnihotri

@shashankska

PhD Candidate at the Chair for ML, Uni Mannheim. Ex- Solunian. MSc. Computer Science, Uni Freiburg. Research Interests: - Computer Vision - Robustness - NAS

Thane, India Katılım Kasım 2012
434 Takip Edilen222 Takipçiler
Siddhartha Gairola
Siddhartha Gairola@sidgairo18·
@shashankska Sure, but I was referring more to the reviewer form and scores - to be uniform / calibrated across venues.
English
2
0
0
53
Siddhartha Gairola
Siddhartha Gairola@sidgairo18·
Food for thought - 🤔 I've been thinking about this long and hard - having been reviewing for popular ML / CV conferences (ICML, ICLR, NeurIPS, CVPR, ICCV, ECCV) - with the community submitting papers across these, it only makes sense to have a uniform reviewer form, guidelines, rules and format across these conferences. Personally I have a real hard time calibrating my scale from 1-10 (ICLR) to 1-6 for CVPR, then we comes ICML which also has 1-6 but 3,4 are weak reject/accept instead of 3,4 as borderline reject/accept (for CVPR). This only gets trickier and worse when you add ICCV, ECCV, NeurIPS into the mix. Then, you add NLP related conferences and Robotics ones, to make the entire system more and more confusing - with uncalibrated reviewer scores coming - which may or may not truly reflect the reviewer's intentions. Happy to hear the thoughts of others. cc: @icmlconf @CVPR @NeurIPSConf @iclr_conf @ICCVConference @eccvconf
Siddhartha Gairola tweet media
English
3
0
8
1.3K
ICML Conference
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 👇
ICML Conference tweet media
English
21
81
594
214.3K
Paul Gavrikov
Paul Gavrikov@PaulGavrikov·
Help, I hit my Claude limit. What do I do now?????
English
2
0
3
240
Siddhartha Gairola
Siddhartha Gairola@sidgairo18·
sidgairo18.github.io/how_to_review_… Since people are now on their final stretch of finalising their ICML reviews. Here are some resources that I had compiled (it's an abridged version of the ICML 2022 reviewer guidelines and some additional resources). Pretty neat 😉 Remember - review as if you would want your paper to be reviewed, read, understood and critiqued.
English
2
1
33
10.9K
Siddhartha Gairola
Siddhartha Gairola@sidgairo18·
Boy these Twitter (X) bots are really irksome 😡💢
English
1
0
1
137
Paul Gavrikov
Paul Gavrikov@PaulGavrikov·
2/2 accepted at CVPR!
Dansk
1
1
28
1.7K
Siddhartha Gairola
Siddhartha Gairola@sidgairo18·
This tiny innocent looking command, has saved more lives than anyone can probably imagine. Give it a Nobel Peace prize already! 😉🏅
Siddhartha Gairola tweet media
English
2
0
9
382
Shashank Agnihotri
Shashank Agnihotri@shashankska·
@PaulGavrikov @sidgairo18 And the people making up papers and citations using LLMs which get accepted to NeurIPS 2025 and the Program Chairs that simply let that go!
English
0
0
0
36
Paul Gavrikov
Paul Gavrikov@PaulGavrikov·
@sidgairo18 Said the first year PhD student before submitting to his first conference
English
2
0
1
57
Siddhartha Gairola
Siddhartha Gairola@sidgairo18·
Research and writing papers is fun 🤓
English
1
0
5
463
Shashank Agnihotri retweetledi
Jitendra MALIK
Jitendra MALIK@JitendraMalikCV·
Now that phantom citations hallucinated by LLMs have been found in NeurIPS papers, what is to be done? Develop a software tool that authors are expected to run to verify their references in Google Scholar. Next, conferences use it to screen papers, and desk reject violators.
English
14
6
181
58.9K