AI conference peer-reviews are completely broken. For NeurIPS 2026, my batch has very low reviewers responses rate (probably less than 5%), given that I have sent reminders twice. Maybe folks are all busy with their own rebuttals; Also for the
@emnlpmeeting ARR submissions, the meta reviewer made factual mistakes and asking tons of ablation studies, however our submission is purely a dataset and benchmark paper, and we made it explicitly clear in all places.
If people don't really want to spend time even understand the paper you are reviewing, then it's probably good to just cancel the conference. What's the point of going through the review processes for months with people not even care what the paper is about? The field is completely broken. I have seen it consistently across multiple conferences.