Paper was rejected on an AI review, and the author says the telltale signs were obvious
sokrypton · x · 2026-07-28
The author says an editor rejected the paper based on an AI review, and the giveaway was the markdown formatting, em dash usage, odd wording, illogical comments, and even a reference to the wrong journal. They have emailed the editor to appeal.
A reply joked that the review should at least have come from a better model, guessing “Gemini flash” from the low-effort style.
Related event: Author Rejects Paper Citing Obviously AI-Generated Peer Review(2 posts)→
More from Companies & People
- University of Toronto opens a Hinton Chair in AI faculty search — CSProfKGD · 2026-07-28
- Jensen Huang: All AI should be available, not locked out for an elite — TinfoilTricorn · 2026-07-28
- LangChain says its NVIDIA partnership helps enterprises own domain intelligence — LangChain · 2026-07-28
- AJ Vaynerchuk uses Claude Code to turn a 45-second memo into internal apps — tomcrawshaw01 · 2026-07-28
- Netlify says AI is making large code migrations more practical and less permanent — thisiskp_ · 2026-07-28
- B2B startups outperformed B2C across revenue, MRR, and ARPU in a 1,127-company study — marclou · 2026-07-28