Major AI Conference Flooded With Peer Reviews Written Fully By AI

An analysis of submissions to next year's International Conference on Learning Representations has found that roughly one in five peer reviews were fully generated by AI, a discovery that came after researchers including Carnegie Mellon's Graham Neubig grew suspicious of feedback on their manuscripts that seemed unusually verbose and requested non-standard statistical analyses.

Neubig posted on X offering a reward for anyone who could scan the conference's submissions for AI-generated text, and Max Spero, CEO of detection tool developer Pangram Labs, responded the next day. Pangram screened all 19,490 studies and 75,800 peer reviews submitted to ICLR 2026, finding that 21% of reviews were fully AI-generated and more than half showed signs of AI use. The conference had permitted AI tools for polishing text but prohibited falsified content. Each reviewer was assigned five papers to review in two weeks on average -- a load that senior programme chair Bharath Hariharan described as 'much higher than what has been done in the past.'

Read more of this story at Slashdot.