Do note that the more the gate is kept, the stronger the incentive for cheating. Moreover, peer review is overrated. An experiment by the NIPS conference in 20

Do note that the more the gate is kept, the stronger the incentive for cheating. Moreover, peer review is overrated. An experiment by the NIPS conference in 2014 found that ~60% of submissions are in the "gray middle" - not obviously great or obviously crap. In more detail: they split the PC in two, and had 10% of papers (166) reviewed by both halves. Each half had to accept ~37 papers. The halves disagreed on 21 accepted papers [1]. So yeah, if your submission is sciencey, it's the flip of a coin whether peer review will accept it. [1] https://hunch.net/?p=467864 https://hunch.net/?p=467864