We’re launching Lyria 3.5 in Google Flow Music, with advances across musicality, lyrics, vocals, and creative control
deepmind.google·6d ago
AI Engineering
Reddit r/MachineLearning·May 19·3 min read
[ECCV 2026] No modified date next to reviews [D]
TL;DR
ECCV 2026 (a major computer vision conference) review submissions lack visible modification timestamps, making it unclear when reviewers last updated their feedback. The conference platform does not display a 'modified date' field alongside peer reviews, creating ambiguity about review freshness.
✦ Why It Matters
Conference participants need modification timestamps to assess review credibility and understand the timeline of evaluation decisions.
Key Takeaways
- Add visible modification dates to review documents for transparency.
- Implement version control or edit logs in conference submission systems.
- Consider timestamp metadata as standard in academic review platforms.
- Track reviewer feedback changes to improve accountability mechanisms.
Full Summary
ECCV 2026 submissions revealed a usability gap in the conference review system: review documents do not display modification dates or timestamps indicating when reviewers made changes to their feedback. This absence creates ambiguity about review timeliness and whether feedback reflects current thinking or outdated assessments.
The Reddit thread surfaced concerns that peer review transparency—the ability to track when and how reviewer opinions evolved—is compromised without visible edit metadata. Participants discussed whether conference management platforms should implement version control or timestamp logging similar to collaborative document tools.
No concrete solution was proposed, but the discussion highlighted that academic review infrastructure often lacks features standard in modern software development. The implications affect both reviewer accountability and author confidence in feedback quality.