<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Making Paper Reviewing Robust to Bid Manipulation Attacks · HackerPapers discussions</title><link>https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2102.06020/</link><description>Collected HN comments and submissions linking this paper.</description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Nov 2026 11:16:22 GMT</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2102.06020/feed.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><item><title>Making Paper Reviewing Robust to Bid Manipulation Attacks — mentioned by cg563</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27297035</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:mention:2102.06020:27297035</guid><pubDate>Wed, 26 May 2021 22:41:12 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;We actually have a paper at ICML this year on exactly defending against these collusion rings: https://arxiv.org/abs/2102.06020 One critical vulnerability in the current reviewing pipeline is that the reviewer assignment algorithm places too much weight on the bids. Imagine if you bid on only your friend&amp;#x27;s paper. The assignment system, if they assign you to any paper at all, is highly likely to assign you to your friend&amp;#x27;s paper. If you register duplicate accounts or if there are enough colluders, the chance of being assigned to that paper is extremely high. Fortunately, this is also easy to…&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2102.06020/"&gt;Paper and discussion history&lt;/a&gt;. A mention is not an endorsement.&lt;/p&gt;</description><category>cs.CR</category></item></channel></rss>
