Submitting to top ML Conferences without Sharing code [D]

Reddit r/MachineLearning / 4/27/2026

💬 OpinionIdeas & Deep AnalysisIndustry & Market Moves

共有:

Key Points

The post asks whether authors should stop including code in submissions to top ML conferences, especially given the rise of capable AI agents and new ways people might replicate or analyze work.
It notes that reviewers often may not closely review code, but authors sometimes hear that withholding it could still lead to negative reactions or concerns about reproducibility.
The author observes mixed experiences: some labmates submitted without sharing code in the ICML cycle and did not face backlash from reviewers.
They question how to balance reproducibility elements that can be provided without code—such as described algorithms, hyperparameter tuning protocols, and the number of experimental repetitions—against fears of idea theft.
Overall, the post frames the request as a discussion seeking community feedback on norms and risk management for ML conference paper submissions.

Asking primarily due to the NIPS deadline. I have always submitted code with my submissions to all conferences before. However, with how good new AI agents are nowadays, I wanted to gather feedback on whether we should stop sharing code in submissions and publish them after acceptance. However, what if the submission focuses on other parts of reproducibility, like the algorithm mentioned, the hyperparameter tuning protocol mentioned, as well as the number of repetitions?

Based on my prior experience, reviewers do not really look at code. But they seem to crib if it is not provided. But I saw a couple of my labmates not share code in the ICML cycle, and the reviewers did not crib about it. After hearing some horror stories of ideas being stolen based on code on this sub, is it reasonable not to submit code for submissions? I am simply curious.

submitted by /u/Massive-Bobcat-5363
[link] [comments]