1 of 1
Story summary
- Pangram Labs' AI-detection tool found about 21% of the 75,800 ICLR peer reviews AI-generated.
- The analysis shows more than half of reviews show AI involvement.
- Graham Neubig from Carnegie Mellon University raised concerns about vague feedback and hallucinated citations.
- Elliott from the University of Copenhagen confirmed one review had incorrect numerical results and odd expressions.
- ICLR organizers will deploy automated tools to monitor AI use in submissions and reviews.
