Skip to main content

Blog

Learn About Our Meetup

5000+ Members

MEETUPS

LEARN, CONNECT, SHARE

Join our meetup, learn, connect, share, and get to know your Toronto AI community. 

JOB POSTINGS

INDEED POSTINGS

Browse through the latest deep learning, ai, machine learning postings from Indeed for the GTA.

CONTACT

CONNECT WITH US

Are you looking to sponsor space, be a speaker, or volunteer, feel free to give us a shout.

[R] Is PNAS journal becoming a dumping ground for rejected AI/ML papers?

As a reviewer, chair and general academic, I’m beginning to notice a pattern where a paper will get rejected from NeurIPS, ICLR, ICML only to end up in PNAS later on. I won’t name specific papers, but it has happened at least on a few occasions directly in my own experience. Furthermore, the are not any substantial modifications to the work either. Has anyone else noticed this pattern as well?

PNAS is a reputable journal, but they do not have the computational/technical reviewer pools that are aware of the work going on in the AI/ML community. So I suspect that some are taking advantage of this.

submitted by /u/NoSouth5
[link] [comments]