Researchers slam arXiv's LLM paper crackdown for lacking any empirical evidence
RexDouglass · x · 2026-09-10
Researcher yanaiela publicly questioned arXiv's policy move targeting LLM-generated papers: the decision came with no empirical evidence. How many LLM-generated papers are actually posted on arXiv? What share are position papers? Do those ratios justify such an abrupt solution, and how are 'review papers' even defined?
RexDouglass amplified the critique, calling it an example of real meta-science on LLM usage — in contrast to arXiv and the anti-AI camp, who he says are simply making things up instead of using data.
Related event: Study finds arXiv's LLM paper restrictions lack empirical basis(4 posts)→
More from Safety
- MacAskill compiles years of extinction warnings from Altman, Sutskever, and Anthropic leaders — kipperrii · 2026-09-10
- Safety researcher: robust AI verification matters more than treaties for global safety — davidmanheim · 2026-09-10
- Open source won't save cybersecurity: whoever has more GPUs wins — andrew_n_carr · 2026-09-10
- From Idiot Savant to Runaway Swarm: How We Got Here and What's Next for AI Risk — stritefax · 2026-09-10
- Podcast: China's agent rules and Baseten's latest — The Cognitive Revolution · 2026-09-10
- Europol lobbies EU to ban end-to-end encryption, labels PETs 'tools of criminals' — wen_ragnarok · 2026-09-10