Study Reveals Disconnect Between Expectations and Practice in AI Disclosure
danish037 · x · 2026-08-25
An analysis of 13,867 disclosure statements from EMNLP 2025 and ICLR 2026 reveals a significant gap between researcher expectations and actual practices in AI disclosure. While CS researchers deem disclosure most necessary for tasks involving research design (e.g., proposing hypotheses, generating synthetic data) with low human involvement, and least necessary for writing and reporting, writing assistance is frequently disclosed in practice despite its perceived lower necessity.
More from Safety
- Anthropic red team's first-ever model "abliteration" cut GLM-5.3 refusals from 90% to 3% for ~$4,400 — cephaloform · 2026-10-16
- Anthropic grants METR employee-like access as independent safety evaluators go public — AnthropicAI · 2026-10-16
- APEX-Harm benchmark: script-based injection attacks easily compromise agents in shared workspaces — KAUST · 2026-10-16
- Residual-stream forecasts predict agent violations before they happen, USC study shows — USC · 2026-10-16
- AI safety drama: risk research called a 'company effort,' team lead responds — logangraham · 2026-10-16
- Brave's Leo adds end-to-end encrypted chat with GLM via attested TEE — gnukeith · 2026-10-16