ArXiv, the open-access repository of preprint academic research, will ban authors of papers for a year if they submit obviously AI-generated work.\u00a0<\/p>\n
Late Thursday evening, Thomas Dietterich, chair of the computer science section of ArXiv, wrote on X<\/a>: \u201cIf generative AI tools generate inappropriate language, plagiarized content, biased content, errors, mistakes, incorrect references, or misleading content, and that output is included in scientific works, it is the responsibility of the author(s). We have recently clarified our penalties for this. If a submission contains incontrovertible evidence that the authors did not check the results of LLM generation, this means we can’t trust anything in the paper.\u201d<\/p>\n Examples of incontrovertible evidence, he wrote, include \u201challucinated references, meta-comments from the LLM (\u2018here is a 200 word summary; would you like me to make any changes?\u2019; \u2018the data in this table is illustrative, fill it in with the real numbers from your experiments\u2019.\u201d<\/p>\n \u201cThe penalty is a 1-year ban from arXiv followed by the requirement that subsequent arXiv submissions must first be accepted at a reputable peer-reviewed venue,\u201d Dietterich wrote.\u00a0<\/p>\n This post is for paid members only<\/p>\n Become a paid member for unlimited ad-free access to articles, bonus podcast content, and more.<\/p>\n