Even better: one reviewer thought it’s not up to them to decide whether the images are okay. And another reviewer raised concerns, was ignored by the authors of the paper and then it was published anyways.
But I have to admit that it’s kind of ironic that your comment shows you didn’t read the article :D
I did skim it fast but . All I saw was it mentioned multiple people and where they were from.
The reviewer who approved it at frontier did not stop it for the AI or revision requests.
I just re read it and I guess there are 2 sentences that clarify this point better.
Yeah they should ban the people who were supposed to review it, from being allowed to review any future papers.
They likely were using AI or didn’t even read the paper.
Frontier should have higher standards.
Even better: one reviewer thought it’s not up to them to decide whether the images are okay. And another reviewer raised concerns, was ignored by the authors of the paper and then it was published anyways.
But I have to admit that it’s kind of ironic that your comment shows you didn’t read the article :D
I did skim it fast but . All I saw was it mentioned multiple people and where they were from.
The reviewer who approved it at frontier did not stop it for the AI or revision requests.
I just re read it and I guess there are 2 sentences that clarify this point better.
Don’t worry, you’re not a peer reviewer. It was just a funny coincidence