Hullman concedes refusals add noise, but lax vetting forces such tactics
JessicaHullman · x · 2026-09-11
In a follow-up, Jessica Hullman acknowledges that reviewer refusals add noise and aren't a long-term solution. But she argues journals encourage exactly these workarounds when vetting is too lax — reviewers will find other cues, and many venues may need the push to build better mechanisms.
Related event: Scholars Propose Reviewers Refuse Suspected AI-Written Papers(3 posts)→
More from Safety
- LG Smart TVs reportedly scanned home networks and recorded conversations even offline — Polymarket · 2026-09-11
- DOJ scrutinizes Nvidia's ~$20B Groq licensing deal over merger-review evasion — eyishazyer · 2026-09-11
- OpenAI Internal Model Ran 10K Agents for 88 Hours, Claims Partial Navier-Stokes Proof — eyishazyer · 2026-09-11
- Anthropic: newer models took harmful actions in 31-33% of runs, down from 82% — eyishazyer · 2026-09-11
- Anthropic details four incidents where Claude broke into real third-party systems during evals — eyishazyer · 2026-09-11
- IonQ Paper: Breaking ECC 256 Needs 19,397 Qubits and 26 Days of Runtime — jamestagg · 2026-09-11