Frontier LLMs may judge arguments well, but not novelty
PlisSergey · x · 2026-07-26
The author argues that frontier LLMs are already better than humans at judging the quality of an argument.
But they should not be used to judge novelty or idea quality. In the author’s view, humans are already poor at that, but LLMs are even worse — and if novelty is delegated to models, the field risks “worshipping the phlogiston of the day.”
Related event: Frontier LLMs Excel at Peer Review but Struggle with Novelty(2 posts)→
More from AGI Musings
- AI math era taught an order of magnitude more people what frontier math looks like — tszzl · 2026-09-23
- Beyond technical alignment: repligate clashes over whether AI can produce rich qualia — repligate · 2026-09-23
- Mathematicians, not just LLMs, made AI's math breakthroughs possible, scholars argue — tak3sh8 · 2026-09-23
- Why would an uncontrollable superintelligence do anything for us? Reddit debate — conn_r2112 · 2026-09-23
- X user calls for full-speed AI-driven science: braking research is 'an absurd waste' — Dr_Singularity · 2026-09-23
- Is Using LLM Output Plagiarism? A Debate Over Redefining Writing Ethics — soumitrashukla9 · 2026-09-23