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
- dunkhippo33 Shares How He Thinks About Raising Kids in the AI Era — kimmonismus · 2026-10-27
- EE-trained AI educator: systems-bottleneck thinking still matters in the AI era — dunkhippo33 · 2026-10-27
- Why Americans pitch better: a lifetime of class presentations, says AI educator — dunkhippo33 · 2026-10-27
- 'Half the sites I try via agents block access' — the anti-bot paradox holding back the agentic economy — XFreeze · 2026-10-27
- Commoditization dilemma: either human labor or GPUs become the commodity — _AustinCalvert_ · 2026-10-27
- Cosmos Institute launches Oxford AI philosophy journal with $10,000 best-paper prize — lawhsw · 2026-10-27