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-moving fields such as artificial intelligence (AI), yet it has become increasingly difficult given the rapid growth of submissions. In this paper, we investigate an underexplored measure for identifying high-impact research: authors' own rankings of their multiple submissions to the same AI conference. Grounded in game-theoretic reasoning, we hypothesize that self-rankings are informative because authors possess unique understanding of their work's conceptual depth and long-term promise. To test this hypothesis, we conducted a large-scale experiment at a leading AI conference, where 1,342 researchers self-ranked their 2,592 submissions by perceived quality. Tracking outcomes over more than a year, we found that papers ranked highest by their authors received twice as many citations as their lowest-ranked counterparts; self-rankings were especially effective at identifying highly cited papers (those with over 150 citations). Moreover, we showed that self-rankings outperformed peer review scores in predicting future citation counts. Our results remained robust after accounting for confounders such as preprint posting time and self-citations. Together, these findings demonstrate that authors' self-rankings provide a reliable and valuable complement to peer review for identifying and elevating high-impact research in AI.

Since the rise of ChatGPT, generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) technologies gained widespread popularity, impacting academic research and everyday communication.5,10 While GenAI offers benefits in task automation,9 it can also be misused and abused in nefarious applications,7 with significant risks to long-tail populations.6 Professionals in fields such as journalism and law still remain cautious due to concerns related to hallucinations and ethical issues, but scholars in computer science (CS), the field where GenAI originated, appear to be cautiously, yet actively exploring its use. For instance, Liang, W. et al.3 report the increased use of large language models (LLMs) in the CS scholarly articles (up to 17.5%), compared to mathematics articles (up to 6.3%), and Liang, W. et al.2 report that, between 6.5% and 16.9% of peer reviews at ICLR 2024, NeurIPS 2023, CoRL 2023, and EMNLP 2023 may have been altered by LLMs beyond minor revisions. Considering researchers' increasing adoption of GenAI, it is crucial to establish usage policies to promote fair and ethical practices in scholarly writing and peer reviews.

Autonomous artificial agents must be able to learn behaviors in complex environments without humans to design tasks and rewards. Designing these functions for each environment is not feasible, thus, motivating the development of intrinsic reward functions. In this paper, we propose using several cognitive elements that have been neglected for a long time to build an internal world model for an intrinsically motivated agent. Our agent performs satisfactory iterations with the environment, learning complex behaviors without needing previously designed reward functions. We used 18 Atari games to evaluate what cognitive skills emerge in games that require reactive and deliberative behaviors. Our results show superior performance compared to the state-of-the-art in many test cases with dense and sparse rewards.

We conducted an experiment during the review process of the 2023 International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML) that requested authors with multiple submissions to rank their own papers based on perceived quality. We received 1,342 rankings, each from a distinct author, pertaining to 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 author-provided rankings. Our analysis demonstrates that the ranking-calibrated scores outperform raw scores in estimating the ground truth ``expected review scores'' in both squared and absolute error metrics. Moreover, we propose several cautious, low-risk approaches to using the Isotonic Mechanism and author-provided rankings in peer review processes, including assisting senior area chairs' oversight of area chairs' recommendations, supporting the selection of paper awards, and guiding the recruitment of emergency reviewers. We conclude the paper by addressing the study's limitations and proposing future research directions.

Recent work in deep learning has shown strong empirical and theoretical evidence of an implicit low-rank bias: weight matrices in deep networks tend to be approximately low-rank and removing relatively small singular values during training or from available trained models may significantly reduce model size while maintaining or even improving model performance. However, the majority of the theoretical investigations around low-rank bias in neural networks deal with oversimplified deep linear networks. In this work, we consider general networks with nonlinear activations and the weight decay parameter, and we show the presence of an intriguing neural rank collapse phenomenon, connecting the low-rank bias of trained networks with networks' neural collapse properties: as the weight decay parameter grows, the rank of each layer in the network decreases proportionally to the within-class variability of the hidden-space embeddings of the previous layers. Our theoretical findings are supported by a range of experimental evaluations illustrating the phenomenon.

This paper presents the computational challenge on topological deep learning that was hosted within the ICML 2023 Workshop on Topology and Geometry in Machine Learning. The competition asked participants to provide open-source implementations of topological neural networks from the literature by contributing to the python packages TopoNetX (data processing) and TopoModelX (deep learning). The challenge attracted twenty-eight qualifying submissions in its two-month duration. This paper describes the design of the challenge and summarizes its main findings.

Fine-tuning is the primary methodology for tailoring pre-trained large language models to specific tasks. As the model's scale and the diversity of tasks expand, parameter-efficient fine-tuning methods are of paramount importance. One of the most widely used family of methods is low-rank adaptation (LoRA) and its variants. LoRA encodes weight update as the product of two low-rank matrices. Despite its advantages, LoRA falls short of full-parameter fine-tuning in terms of generalization error for certain tasks. We introduce Chain of LoRA (COLA), an iterative optimization framework inspired by the Frank-Wolfe algorithm, to bridge the gap between LoRA and full parameter fine-tuning, without incurring additional computational costs or memory overheads. COLA employs a residual learning procedure where it merges learned LoRA modules into the pre-trained language model parameters and re-initilize optimization for new born LoRA modules. We provide theoretical convergence guarantees as well as empirical results to validate the effectiveness of our algorithm. Across various models (OPT and llama-2) and seven benchmarking tasks, we demonstrate that COLA can consistently outperform LoRA without additional computational or memory costs.

A key aspect of human intelligence is the ability to imagine -- composing learned concepts in novel ways -- to make sense of new scenarios. Such capacity is not yet attained for machine learning systems. In this work, in the context of visual reasoning, we show how modularity can be leveraged to derive a compositional data augmentation framework inspired by imagination. Our method, denoted Object-centric Compositional Neural Module Network (OC-NMN), decomposes visual generative reasoning tasks into a series of primitives applied to objects without using a domain-specific language. We show that our modular architectural choices can be used to generate new training tasks that lead to better out-of-distribution generalization. We compare our model to existing and new baselines in proposed visual reasoning benchmark that consists of applying arithmetic operations to MNIST digits.

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 rankings to enhance peer review in machine learning and artificial intelligence conferences by extending the Isotonic Mechanism to exponential family distributions. This mechanism generates adjusted scores that closely align with the original scores while adhering to author-specified rankings. Despite its applicability to a broad spectrum of exponential family distributions, implementing this mechanism does not require knowledge of the specific distribution form. We demonstrate that an author is incentivized to provide accurate rankings when her utility takes the form of a convex additive function of the adjusted review scores. For a certain subclass of exponential family distributions, we prove that the author reports truthfully only if the question involves only pairwise comparisons between her submissions, thus indicating the optimality of ranking in truthful information elicitation. Moreover, we show that the adjusted scores improve dramatically the estimation accuracy compared to the original scores and achieve nearly minimax optimality when the ground-truth scores have bounded total variation. We conclude the paper by presenting experiments conducted on the ICML 2023 ranking data, which show significant estimation gain using the Isotonic Mechanism.

This paper seeks to address the dense labeling problems where a significant fraction of the dataset can be pruned without sacrificing much accuracy. We observe that, on standard medical image segmentation benchmarks, the loss gradient norm-based metrics of individual training examples applied in image classification fail to identify the important samples. To address this issue, we propose a data pruning method by taking into consideration the training dynamics on target regions using Dynamic Average Dice (DAD) score. To the best of our knowledge, we are among the first to address the data importance in dense labeling tasks in the field of medical image analysis, making the following contributions: (1) investigating the underlying causes with rigorous empirical analysis, and (2) determining effective data pruning approach in dense labeling problems. Our solution can be used as a strong yet simple baseline to select important examples for medical image segmentation with combined data sources.