Researchers worry papers and meta-reviews are both getting AI-written
fredahshi · x · 2026-07-22
The quoted post says the author often ends up writing human-authored meta-reviews for papers that were themselves mostly AI-reviewed, and many may have also been partially AI-written.
They mention seeing a lot of 100% AI scores on Pangram and say the situation feels demoralizing, even if AI can clearly help in research.
The main point is not that AI use in research is inherently bad, but that the community should openly discuss what happens when:
- papers are increasingly AI-assisted
- reviews are also AI-assisted
- authors and reviewers are both using AI tools in hidden ways
The post frames this as a broader conversation about research norms rather than a solved problem.
More from AGI Musings
- Data engineering, not agent frameworks, is the real bottleneck for enterprise AI agents — dhruv2038 · 2026-09-11
- François Fleuret: Only Two Long-Term Futures — No Super AI, or Staying Fully Human With It — francoisfleuret · 2026-09-11
- IG reel debunking the 'winning the AI race against China' fallacy hits 500k likes — louisvarge · 2026-09-11
- Post-AI World Leaves No Room for Learning on the Job — rachittshah · 2026-09-11
- Researcher questions AI safety eval firm, citing 'blatantly sloppy' security and monitoring — Kyrannio · 2026-09-11
- AI researcher memes agent-swarm tinkering with He Jiankui's embryo-editing quote — dejavucoder · 2026-09-11