Yoshitomo Matsubara
@yoshitomo_cs
Followers
2K
Following
5K
Media
215
Statuses
2K
Research Scientist @Yahoo, PhD in Computer Science @UCIrvine. Research: ML, NLP, CV, IR, Open Source/Science. Technical Chair: #CVPR2026 #ICCV2025 #WACV2026
Bellevue, WA
Joined February 2020
🫡 BTW, very curious how they detected collisions Many people declined "bribe offers" under the table and reported to PCs? If so, 👏
0
0
2
Our blog update on ICLR 2026 response to a major security incident: https://t.co/fdhbbVedTS
4
17
108
ahhhh, I really wish I could attend NeurIPS for this... 😭 https://t.co/9B9xDG5gDN
Join our NeurIPS social event: The Role of AI in Scientific Peer Review. Help build community and explore solutions for a fair, efficient, and transparent peer review system. Wed. Dec. 3rd, 7:00 PM – 9:00 PM #NeurIPS2025
0
0
0
Are you passionate about connecting 3D perception / world modeling with learning-based control for humanoid mobile manipulation in the real world? The Dynamic Robotics and AI Lab (DRAIL) https://t.co/lh69gagK9X at Oregon State University is recruiting 2–3 PhD students to help
1
1
16
Totally agree!
(5/5)As it is becoming abundantly clear that the current hyper-scaling paradigm for LLMs is not going to lead to AGI / superintelligence, perhaps it is time to return to a “cooperate” framework? Publish research results openly, and build on what each other has published.
0
0
0
I'm gonna miss the entire #NeurIPS2025... 🥲 If you are attending NeurIPS'25 and find peer-review related topics, let me know Specifically, I want to know - any interesting ideas exchanged for improving the system - reactions from workshops targeted by an author with 80 papers
1
0
1
hmm, examples in the thread will make the works look like blog posts to me...
On @arxiv, we are receiving more and more submissions with short sections and many bulleted lists. I'm curious what my fellow researchers think about this style of research paper. Should this become our standard practice, or does this style omit too many details?
0
0
0
Statement by our #CVPR2026 Program Chairs on the recent @openreviewnet security vulnerability.
0
6
21
It looks still beta. I found one YouTube video The UI seems relatively modern, compared to other platforms Though I've never used CMT as a program chair, I feel "CMT" at many places, like CMT with modernized UI https://t.co/UfUYmOk59H
0
0
1
Wow. such a strong statement from IJCAI 👀 I've never heard about "ChairingTool" What are their unique features compared to existing peer-review platforms? Last time I served for IJCAI as a Program Committee (reviewer), they used CMT3
Double-Blind Intact: IJCAI Confirms No OpenReview Use. #Statement Never relying on #OpenReview, IJCAI confirms that its peer-review process — including IJCAI-ECAI 2026 — remains fully uncompromised, using the independent ChairingTool platform. https://t.co/2f7bQKOTk2
#IJCAI2026
2
0
1
Statement from ACL and EACL 2026 Organizers On Nov 27, OpenReview (OR) was notified of a software bug that allowed unauthorized access to authors, reviewers, and area chairs. We are grateful to the OpenReview team for fixing the issue quickly. (1/3)
1
20
73
ICLR has placed OpenReview in a difficult position, so I want to offer a few words about the OpenReview team working behind the scenes. OpenReview has long been operated at UMass Amherst as a non-profit organization founded by Andrew McCallum. Each year, Andrew must raise more
26
134
966
Why do people still work on leaked data and even proudly share their "work" in public? Though I am not actively policing, such posts still come to my attention...
I happened to find presumably leaked data from an OR-based conference in public and immediately reported the case to OpenReview If you find such sources, share the info with OpenReview and/or the venue organizers privately, not publicly
0
0
0
Here we should think OpenReview's responsibility and bad actors' actions separately Does a door left open legally or morally justify collecting (and spreading) private things? I would not think so
Some people tried to tweak what I said. Let me spell it out for those naysayers. 1. OpenReview API could be used to retrieve identities that should not have been accessible. This is a data leak. OpenReview is the sole responsible for this. 2. Resharing or using personal data
1
0
2
Also shared the case with the organizer Luckily, they already took an action
0
0
0
I happened to find presumably leaked data from an OR-based conference in public and immediately reported the case to OpenReview If you find such sources, share the info with OpenReview and/or the venue organizers privately, not publicly
1
0
1
The attackers may have not taken their own actions seriously, but I am glad that the OR team took strong actions for this
0
0
2
This may be the most serious issue I have ever seen in the peer-review systems However, as pointed out here, we should immediately report the bug to the team, instead of sharing in public or keeping silent Very disappointing that some people actively exploited the vulnerability
1
1
8