The ICML 2023 Ranking Experiment: Examining Author Self-Assessment in ML/AI Peer Review
We conducted an experiment during the review process of the 2023 International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML), asking authors with multiple submissions to rank their papers based on perceived quality. In total, we received 1,342 rankings, each from a different author, covering 2,592 submissions. In this paper, we present an empirical analysis of how author-provided rankings could be leveraged to improve peer review processes at machine learning conferences. We focus on the Isotonic Mechanism, which calibrates raw review scores using the author-provided rankings. Our analysis shows that these ranking-calibrated scores outperform the raw review scores in estimating the ground truth ``expected review scores'' in terms of both squared and absolute error metrics. Furthermore, we propose several cautious, low-risk applications of the Isotonic Mechanism and author-provided rankings in peer review, including supporting senior area chairs in overseeing area chairs' recommendations, assisting in the selection of paper awards, and guiding the recruitment of emergency reviewers.
Code (1)
Methods 이 논문이 사용한 방법론
Similar Papers 제목 키워드 기반
Rejoinder: The ICML 2023 Ranking Experiment: Examining Author Self-Assessment in ML/AI Peer Review
This article is the rejoinder to ``The ICML 2023 Ranking Experiment: Examining Author Self-Assessment in ML/AI Peer Review,'' to appear in the Journal of the American Statistical Association with discussion. To address t…
From Authors to Reviewers: Leveraging Rankings to Improve Peer Review
This paper is a discussion of the 2025 JASA discussion paper by Su et al. (2025). We would like to congratulate the authors on conducting a comprehensive and insightful empirical investigation of the 2023 ICML ranking da…
Isotonic Mechanism for Exponential Family Estimation in Machine Learning Peer Review
In 2023, the International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML) required authors with multiple submissions to rank their submissions based on perceived quality. In this paper, we aim to employ these author-specified ran…
You Are the Best Reviewer of Your Own Papers: The Isotonic Mechanism
Machine learning (ML) and artificial intelligence (AI) conferences including NeurIPS and ICML have experienced a significant decline in peer review quality in recent years. To address this growing challenge, we introduce…
How to Find Fantastic AI Papers: Self-Rankings as a Powerful Predictor of Scientific Impact Beyond Peer Review
Peer review in academic research aims not only to ensure factual correctness but also to identify work of high scientific potential that can shape future research directions. This task is especially critical in fast-movi…