Authorship should follow contribution, but AI still cannot be named as a co-author
CsabaSzepesvari · x · 2026-07-23
The author argues that authorship should be decided by the actual contribution, not by whether a participant was human or AI.
The punchline is that this principle is reasonable in practice, but it exposes a strange gap in current norms: the AI system itself is not listed as a co-author. The post suggests that this may eventually have to change as AI systems become more deeply involved in research workflows.
Related event: AI-Dominated Research Sparks Debate on Academic Authorship(6 posts)→
More from AGI Musings
- Narcissism is debilitating — we can build safeguards without demonizing people, argues Masley — AndyMasley · 2026-10-27
- Pop psychology myths about mental disorders were largely invented online to dehumanize patients — AndyMasley · 2026-10-27
- Pedro Domingos: as intelligence gets cheap, demand will skyrocket — pmddomingos · 2026-10-27
- Apollo chief economist: AI has delivered zero financial payoff outside Big Tech — rseroter · 2026-10-27
- OpenAI acquires Orchestra Bio to bring clinical-trial monitoring agents into drug development — dl_weekly · 2026-10-27
- Do AI agents work better when they pace themselves and take breaks? — EpistemicHope · 2026-10-27