iiinova — where your digital self keeps evolving

Yoshitomo Matsubara @yoshitomo-matsubara.net · 05/10/2026

Too many great Mario games to add 😂

020

Yoshitomo Matsubara @yoshitomo-matsubara.net · 05/10/2026

Looks so fun! though I'm afraid that I'm outlier here😂 My 9 games #My9Games www.my9games.net/en/share/3d2...

120

Yoshitomo Matsubara @yoshitomo-matsubara.net · 04/10/2026

Blackout while heatwave is hitting California 🥵

010

Yoshitomo Matsubara @yoshitomo-matsubara.net · 02/10/2026

Great initiative and big improvement!👏 I support the change. It can be even stricter 😃

000

Yoshitomo Matsubara @yoshitomo-matsubara.net · 25/09/2026

Thanks for sharing Probably I should provide more guidelines in my repo, too

000

Yoshitomo Matsubara @yoshitomo-matsubara.net · 24/09/2026

> since whatever you do to the model response also encourage or discourage contributions by legitimate contributors This. > But we have made some efforts especially on PRs to discorage overly long messages If you don't mind, could you share a few such PRs?

101

Yoshitomo Matsubara @yoshitomo-matsubara.net · 24/09/2026

As an OSS maintainer, how would you feel when you see an seemingly autogenerated "bug report" as a GH issue at your repo? Bonus: you learn the same user did the same for many repos in last few hours

120

Reposted by Yoshitomo Matsubara

Angela Dai @adai.bsky.social · 18/09/2026

🚀We have PhD openings in my lab! 3D got pretty interesting :) Generation is getting better, which makes real scenes more interesting: things get used, opened, moved, etc We want to understand that in 3D: function, dynamics, physics 👉apply 3dunderstanding.org/openings.html or via ELLIS

0137

Yoshitomo Matsubara @yoshitomo-matsubara.net · 18/09/2026

Thanks @paulvicol.bsky.social for building the nice blog! 👏 Our previous Medium posts were migrated to the new blog Time to say goodbye to our legacy Medium blog 👋

000

Reposted by Yoshitomo Matsubara

Gautam Kamath @gautamkamath.com · 16/09/2026

Nihar Shah did a heroic experiment for TMLR: he spent 20-25 hours over two weeks interviewing authors of seemingly low-quality submissions about their own papers. He confirmed what we all suspected: people submitting these papers have *no idea* what is going on in them.

5293117

Yoshitomo Matsubara @yoshitomo-matsubara.net · 17/09/2026

Here is the followup bsky.app/profile/yosh...

051

Yoshitomo Matsubara @yoshitomo-matsubara.net · 16/09/2026

Do authors understand their own papers? Our desk rejection rate at TMLR is about 53% while it was only 6% in 2023 To understand the situation and assess our process, Nihar asked authors about their own TMLR submissions Learn the findings of the pilot study & share your thought

0235

Yoshitomo Matsubara @yoshitomo-matsubara.net · 13/09/2026

We, TMLR, are experiencing the same Some of us did a pilot study. The findings will be publicly shared soon

1130

Yoshitomo Matsubara @yoshitomo-matsubara.net · 11/09/2026

Another great initiative to make the review process sustainable, this time from NLP community TBH, I am not certain yet that a lottery would work out. 20-submission cap sounds too much I like ideas to support those who need it such as mentorship🤗

041

Yoshitomo Matsubara @yoshitomo-matsubara.net · 10/09/2026

#ECCV2026 Day 3 Another day with a full of discussions towards next conferences and some prizes (T-shirt and VIP party) Unfortunately, I have to leave here tomorrow and go back home It was a little bit short, yet a fruitful time for me🤗 Thank you all who made those happen!

010

Yoshitomo Matsubara @yoshitomo-matsubara.net · 09/09/2026

#ECCV2026 Day 2 Discussion, discussion, brainstorming, and discussion It was a very fruitful day 🤗

110

Yoshitomo Matsubara @yoshitomo-matsubara.net · 08/09/2026

#ECCV2026 Day 1 Jet lag hit me hard after lunch 😪

100

Yoshitomo Matsubara @yoshitomo-matsubara.net · 07/09/2026

#ECCV2026 Day 0 starts with AC workshop, my favorite 🤗

190

Yoshitomo Matsubara @yoshitomo-matsubara.net · 05/09/2026

Heading to Malmö, Sweden for #ECCV2026 ✈️ If you attend it in person and want to discuss the current peer-review systems, hit me up and discuss 🤗

060

Yoshitomo Matsubara @yoshitomo-matsubara.net · 05/09/2026

yeah, I heard that, too Hope they secure at least authors of accepted papers (though I heard only first authors are guaranteed) and reviewers / ACs / SACs

010

Yoshitomo Matsubara @yoshitomo-matsubara.net · 04/09/2026

That's a fair point. It may be next topic @jeffreybrainard.bsky.social may want to discuss I'm happy to discuss that in person during ECCV :)

000

Yoshitomo Matsubara @yoshitomo-matsubara.net · 04/09/2026

I was interviewed by @jeffreybrainard.bsky.social from Science about "AI peer-review" and shared my experience Science published his article yesterday. While I found many of the names mentioned in the article familiar, I learned a lot from it Check it out and share your thoughts!

161

Yoshitomo Matsubara @yoshitomo-matsubara.net · 03/09/2026

I'll be there from Day 0 for the AC workshop until Day 3 (leave there Day 4 morning)👋

110

Yoshitomo Matsubara @yoshitomo-matsubara.net · 03/09/2026

What about the first CVPR'28 planning meeting in Malmö ? (half joking) 😁

110

Yoshitomo Matsubara @yoshitomo-matsubara.net · 02/09/2026

I like the #ICLR2027 submission policies and strongly support them "The deanonymization policy" is my favorite Personally, I think all major AI/ML-related conferences should follow that in this era The submission cap can be even lower, say 10 or even 5 from next year blog.iclr.cc/2026/09/02/s...

blog.iclr.cc

Submission policies for ICLR 2027 – ICLR Blog

0146

Yoshitomo Matsubara @yoshitomo-matsubara.net · 02/09/2026

Two weeks passed after #NeurIPS2026 meta-review deadline Nothing has happened since then. No message from PCs or SAC We still have three more weeks until the decision release Who is currently working on what? Are PCs chasing late ACs?

110

Yoshitomo Matsubara @yoshitomo-matsubara.net · 01/09/2026

Is it becoming a common practice to use a rage/engagement-baity title in a paper? I feel it's unprofessional and insincere for the community Also, deflecting valid criticism as envy is next level Not citing the posts to avoid further attention being paid to the ragebait poster

000

Reposted by Yoshitomo Matsubara

Transactions on Machine Learning Research @tmlrorg.bsky.social · 31/08/2026

TMLR has refocused its acceptance criteria to place more emphasis on clear writing. Read more in this blog post: medium.com/@TmlrOrg/inc...

medium.com

Increasing Emphasis on Clear Writing in Acceptance Criteria

Three things are true today:

1357

Yoshitomo Matsubara @yoshitomo-matsubara.net · 16/08/2026

Dear #NeurIPS2026 reviewers Your final justification should justify your final rating "The rebuttal addressed / didn't address my concerns." doesn't even reach the acceptable bar or help ACs write meaningful meta-reviews either Please make it more specific and JUSTIFY the score

000

Yoshitomo Matsubara @yoshitomo-matsubara.net · 15/08/2026

Again, I like the preliminary meta-review experiment #NeurIPS2026 Yet, I don't understand why ACs need to edit the existing meta-review field including "Final meta-review update:" AND then fill "Final Justification" field Those two fields seem almost identical to me

110

Reposted by Yoshitomo Matsubara

Gautam Kamath @gautamkamath.com · 13/08/2026

This was a tough decision. Surveys can have value. And I think a great survey now is of higher value than ever before. But finding great surveys is increasingly reviewer labour intensive, and it's adjacent to our main scope and mission.

3192

Reposted by Yoshitomo Matsubara

Transactions on Machine Learning Research @tmlrorg.bsky.social · 13/08/2026

Starting September 1, 2026, TMLR will no longer be considering survey papers for review. This is in part due to limited reviewer resources and significant required labour for reviewing surveys, as well as the evolving role of surveys in our field.

0126

Yoshitomo Matsubara @yoshitomo-matsubara.net · 12/08/2026

Already started planning next release😊 So much fun

000

Yoshitomo Matsubara @yoshitomo-matsubara.net · 04/08/2026

I'm sad that now I don't feel the cases are outliers... 😫

020

Yoshitomo Matsubara @yoshitomo-matsubara.net · 04/08/2026

Which one(s) are you referring to?

100

Yoshitomo Matsubara @yoshitomo-matsubara.net · 04/08/2026

What makes me more sad is I'm experiencing that as an author as well As far as I can tell, there is no intervention from (S)AC or PCs (and it's "normal"😫 unfortunately)

010

Yoshitomo Matsubara @yoshitomo-matsubara.net · 03/08/2026

"Thank you for the rebuttal. I'll keep my score." As an AC of #NeurIPS2026 E&D track, I asked the reviewer to clarify No response so far How could authors expect them to respond if they don't even reply to an AC? We should set our bar highier and treat it highly irresponsible

270

Yoshitomo Matsubara @yoshitomo-matsubara.net · 01/08/2026

I'm learning something new from a journal platform, which is new to me i.e., not OpenReview It shows me stats of reviewer activity for last X months, and there are reviewers who submitted 100 - 200 reviews in last 6 months (i.e., a review every 1-2 days) What are we doing?

static.klipy.com

Coco Police Skeleton Shocked

ALT: Coco Police Skeleton Shocked

050

Yoshitomo Matsubara @yoshitomo-matsubara.net · 30/07/2026

Kudos to #ICLR2027 PCs for taking strong actions 👏 I like they keep it open to new people, mitigating a risk of "AI slop" Submission cap should be much lower, say 5 papers per author, unless their contribution is significant and they offer quality review workforce accordingly

1213

Yoshitomo Matsubara @yoshitomo-matsubara.net · 28/07/2026

⏫Late update⏫ I got promoted to Senior Research Scientist Grateful for those who supported and my collaborators🙏

1180

Reposted by Yoshitomo Matsubara

European Conference on Computer Vision #ECCV2026 @eccv.bsky.social · 26/07/2026

Thank you to all our #ECCV2026 reviewers. Special thanks to the Outstanding Reviewers for their exceptional contributions! 👏 eccv.ecva.net/Conferences/...

eccv.ecva.net

Program Committee

0184

Yoshitomo Matsubara @yoshitomo-matsubara.net · 24/07/2026

Ambitious me wants to see open-source ver. instead of open-weight ver. and who will remain and/or join

010

Reposted by Yoshitomo Matsubara

WACV Conference @wacvconference.bsky.social · 21/07/2026

WACV 2027 R1 reviews are underway. Reviewers — thank you for your time. Authors — decisions land Aug 8, then rebuttals through Aug 20. Round 2 window: register Aug 20, submit Aug 27 (AoE). wacv.thecvf.com/Conferences/... #WACV2027 #ComputerVision

wacv.thecvf.com

Call for Papers

154

Yoshitomo Matsubara @yoshitomo-matsubara.net · 22/07/2026

BTW, my suspicious level on "AI-generated" reviews increased this time, which also contributed to increase in my AC workload and time for commitment Good opportunity for me to rethink solutions for the global "too many submissions for limited qualified reviewers" issue

000

Yoshitomo Matsubara @yoshitomo-matsubara.net · 22/07/2026

Finished all initial meta-reviews for #NeurIPS2026 E&D track🥱 While I'm still supportive of this experiment and potentially making it a standard, we should reduce assignments for ACs, say 4-5 papers per AC to help them do better jobs

120

Yoshitomo Matsubara @yoshitomo-matsubara.net · 21/07/2026

Came up w/ a crazy idea from #NeurIPS2026 complaints Create "AI-permissive" and "Legacy/Classic" tracks, expanding the idea of ICML'26 review policy The latter uses "AI-content" detectors w/ thresholds tuned to maximize recall for papers and reviews, and takes strong actions (DR, ban, etc) WDYT?

000

Yoshitomo Matsubara @yoshitomo-matsubara.net · 20/07/2026

It may not be a new problem, but amplified by "AI-generated" artifacts People pursue "good points" e.g., paper accepted / served at top venues and tend to close their eyes to "bad points" e.g., accountability for their papers, reviews, and consuming/wasting community resource

020

Yoshitomo Matsubara @yoshitomo-matsubara.net · 19/07/2026

Writing initial meta-reviews for #NeurIPS2026 It's extra work for ACs, but authors can check how much effort their ACs made for the papers, and flag issues in their assessments if necessary Lazy ACs are more problematic than lazy reviewers I experienced it as an author as well

010