Rejoinder: The ICML 2023 Ranking Experiment: Examining Author Self-Assessment in ML/AI Peer Review

Fuente: arXiv
Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Su, Buxin, Zhang, Jiayao, Collina, Natalie, Yan, Yuling, Li, Didong, Cho, Kyunghyun, Fan, Jianqing, Roth, Aaron, Su, Weijie
Format: Preprint
Published: 2026
Subjects:
Online Access:
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1866917529287393280
author Su, Buxin
Zhang, Jiayao
Collina, Natalie
Yan, Yuling
Li, Didong
Cho, Kyunghyun
Fan, Jianqing
Roth, Aaron
Su, Weijie
author_facet Su, Buxin
Zhang, Jiayao
Collina, Natalie
Yan, Yuling
Li, Didong
Cho, Kyunghyun
Fan, Jianqing
Roth, Aaron
Su, Weijie
contents 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 the practical and theoretical points raised by the discussants, we organize our response around four core themes: (i) formulating peer review as a statistical estimation problem; (ii) mitigating equity and strategic concerns in the deployment of the Isotonic Mechanism; (iii) incorporating complementary signals such as reviewer rankings and structured metadata; and (iv) exploring a human-centered framework for peer review in the era of generative AI.
format Preprint
id arxiv_https___arxiv_org_abs_2605_25172
institution arXiv
publishDate 2026
record_format arxiv
spellingShingle Rejoinder: The ICML 2023 Ranking Experiment: Examining Author Self-Assessment in ML/AI Peer Review
Su, Buxin
Zhang, Jiayao
Collina, Natalie
Yan, Yuling
Li, Didong
Cho, Kyunghyun
Fan, Jianqing
Roth, Aaron
Su, Weijie
Applications
Digital Libraries
Machine Learning
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 the practical and theoretical points raised by the discussants, we organize our response around four core themes: (i) formulating peer review as a statistical estimation problem; (ii) mitigating equity and strategic concerns in the deployment of the Isotonic Mechanism; (iii) incorporating complementary signals such as reviewer rankings and structured metadata; and (iv) exploring a human-centered framework for peer review in the era of generative AI.
title Rejoinder: The ICML 2023 Ranking Experiment: Examining Author Self-Assessment in ML/AI Peer Review
topic Applications
Digital Libraries
Machine Learning
url https://arxiv.org/abs/2605.25172