AI review controversy hits COLM 2026

The peer review system is buckling under the weight of AI research volume, and reviewers turning to LLMs to meet deadlines is making the problem worse. Authors are receiving oddly verbose but structurally hollow critiques that often miss the core contributions of their papers. This follows similar scandals at ICLR and ICML 2026, where an estimated 21% of reviews were found to be AI-generated. Unlike ICML, which actively watermarked submissions to catch lazy reviewers, COLM appears to lack strong enforcement, leaving authors frustrated about the fairness of the rebuttal process.