I was invited to review for NeurIPS 2026 and assigned 4 papers. 2 of 4 are complete AI slop and deserve strong rejects.
They study homework-level problems, use overly lengthy yet uninformative language, and include obviously AI-generated method figures that are not even vector graphics.
I just found an interesting shortcut for identifying these papers: check the number of references. The authors obviously did not systematically survey the area, and many of these papers cite fewer than 20 works in total.