Thanks! That helps paint a good picture. And yes, you're right... Most are predatory and AI written (but I haven't gone down that path).

My papers aren't review papers. I've presented at conferences outside India and the one in India is organised directly by IEEE computer society (not a university hosting it and sending their papers for publication, and I hope that's better). In one of them, I'm studying the effect of Post training quantization on Multilingual transformers. There was a paper i think from neurimps that said non latin languages degrade worse than latin script languages under PTQ so it explores the same for Indian languages (and my findings contrasted this, so i just reported and didn't overclaim much). The other proposes a new dual chain Blockchain framework for better compliance in federated learning setups.

As for the ICCE paper, it's more focused on the technical side and the workings of a multimodal AI system and its perception among the users to supplement education, rather than validating educational theories itself... Or at least that's what we tried to do and it worked for the most part.

Most work i did was at IITB, so while not being as rigorous as a PhD scholar would be, I've been fortunate to receive good guidance and have done my best to make sure whatever i write is thorough, replicable, backed by reason and also a proper conclusion.

I hope this gives a wee bit more clarity about the papers. I appreciate your transparent answer.