A Simple Solution to Improve Broken Peer Review System at AI Conferences [R]

An issue with the peer review system is reciprocal reviewing, which incentivizes reviewers to unfairly reject good papers to increase their own papers' chances of acceptance. My proposed solution is that the conference should divide the authors/papers into 2 halves (A and B). If you are an author in half A, then you will only be a reviewer in half B. All papers by the same author, their coauthors, and coauthors of coauthors should be in the same half. Each AC/SAC can only serve in one half and acceptance decisions for the two halves would be independent.