For the people who got reviews back from neurips, cvpr, eccv, etc and also tested their paper through an agentic reviewer like the stanford one, how different were the reviews? [D]

查看原文

模型发布

热度趋势

新上榜

最近 24 小时与此前 24 小时对比 · 7 天曲线

百分比基于当前可用热度信号，而非评论数或独立用户人数。

AI 摘要

一位Reddit用户发帖询问，那些在neurips、cvpr、eccv等会议上收到审稿意见，并且也通过斯坦福大学等代理审稿人测试过论文的人，他们所收到的审稿意见有何不同。该用户对人类审稿人和LLMs（大型语言模型）生成的审稿意见之间的差异感到好奇，并希望了解这两种审稿方式在评估论文时所提供的反馈有何不同。任何见解都将受到欢迎。

Hello,

I was curious about the differences you can get from the human reviewers and the llms.

Any insight is welcome, thank you!