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
- Economist Ben Moll: You Can Model Anthropic's 15% AI GDP Growth, But It Won't Happen — sebkrier · 2026-09-11
- Cohere Labs launches interactive tool mapping which tasks of 178 occupations AI can automate — Cohere_Labs · 2026-09-11
- AI researcher on SkyNews flags concerns over inequality, power and criminal misuse — schwarzjn_ · 2026-09-11
- VC compares AI doom rhetoric to pandemic-era fear messaging — StewartalsopIII · 2026-09-11
- Anthropic Insiders: Not Everyone at the Lab Believes in High p(doom) — anpaure · 2026-09-11
- Could 10k agents discover learning methods beyond backprop, or just tweak existing ones? — SeunghyunSEO7 · 2026-09-11