Expert attention map

The Who's Who of AI

What credible people across AI noticed, why it matters, and where the field is converging or disagreeing.

2,397 searchable experts 4,280 tracked across all sources
Filter the conversation Who is saying what?

Combine a professional role with a reaction lens. Both must match the same attributed contribution.

Clear all
Active evidence filter

Showing developments with attributable Research & technical analysis reactions.

New Network reaction maps

See how experts are reacting—not just what they shared.

Posts are grouped by conversation and tone. Select a lens to filter the stream; these are never permanent labels on people.

Showing signals surfaced by Christian Wolf ×

The questions experts are actively pulling apart

One card per development. Sources are clustered; reaction bundles describe these posts, never the people behind them.

New AI field signal Analysis 13h ago
research self-confessed fabrications rise

Self-confessed Fabrications and Rise of TBDs

4 experts across 3 network communities independently surfaced this.

Why this matches Research & technical analysis reaction 2 attributable expert contributions · Gautam Kamath, Christian Wolf
“How do you tell if authors fabricated their research results? Sometimes: they just tell you. Read, e.g., this caption carefully. Another banger of a post by my friend Nihar B. Shah on his blog, where he found at least 20+ such #ICLR2027 submissions: researc…” evidence ↗
4 experts 3 communities 1 sources clustered
How the network is reacting 2 experts are emphasizing research & technical analysis.
Shared emphasis

Research & technical analysis

2 experts

Evidence, methods and technical implications.

“How do you tell if authors fabricated their research results? Sometimes: they just tell you. Read, e.g., this caption carefully. Another banger of a post by my friend Nihar B. Shah on his blog, where he found at least 20+ such #ICLR2027 submissions: researc…”

3 experts discussed this · 3 posts
Gautam Kamath: How do you tell if authors fabricated their research results? Sometimes: they just tell you. Read, e.g., this caption carefully. Another banger of a post by my friend Nihar B. Shah on his blog, whe…
Naomi Saphra: How do you tell if authors fabricated their research results? Sometimes: they just tell you. Read, e.g., this caption carefully. Another banger of a post by my friend Nihar B. Shah on his blog, whe…
samuel mehr: oopsies
Open the full discussion →

What experts are discussing without an anchoring article

10 experts · 12 posts · 1d ago
Matches Research & technical analysis
“Helping authors improve their papers is not the purpose of peer review.” evidence ↗
Reaction converging Research & technical analysis · 5 Building & implementation · 1
Ben Recht: Helping authors improve their papers is not the purpose of peer review.
Dan Goodman: Keeping academics in their place (as revenue sources for journals).
Open the thread →
3 experts · 5 posts · 18d ago
Matches Research & technical analysis
“6 papers to review for ICLR. Fair game. It's a lot, but I understand I have to contribute, sure. But 16 days to do it is just bad. I won't be able to deliver the best review I can do in such a shor…” evidence ↗
Reaction converging Research & technical analysis · 3
David Picard: 6 papers to review for ICLR. Fair game. It's a lot, but I understand I have to contribute, sure. But 16 days to do it is just bad. I won't be able to deliver the best review I can do in such a shor…
Christian Wolf: I have only 3 but now I receive invites from ACs to receive additional papers.... ?!?
Open the thread →
2 experts · 4 posts · 2d ago
Matches Research & technical analysis
“LLM Impact on peer review: - TMLR increases the importance of clarity - ICML introduces desk rejections by ACs - RSS introduces 2 phases & "signed reviewers" - Some journals temp. suspend submissio…” evidence ↗
Christian Wolf: LLM Impact on peer review: - TMLR increases the importance of clarity - ICML introduces desk rejections by ACs - RSS introduces 2 phases & "signed reviewers" - Some journals temp. suspend submissio…
Christian Wolf: Some of the symptoms: - 9k papers accepted to NeurIPS 2026 - 60k submissions to ICLR 2027
Open the thread →
2 experts · 5 posts · 8d ago
Matches Research & technical analysis
“Karma does exist. Reviewing AI slop papers is our punishment for having invented this technology. Please kill me.” evidence ↗
Shared emphasis Research & technical analysis · 2
Christian Wolf: Karma does exist. Reviewing AI slop papers is our punishment for having invented this technology. Please kill me.
Christian Wolf: What is the current nettiquette? As a reviewer, can I claim that the paper has been written with too much LLM output?
Open the thread →