Researchers clash over arXiv 'oral exams' proposal amid flood of AI-written submissions
RishiBommasani · x · 2026-09-15
- arXiv researcher Tom Dietterich flagged a new trend: authors submitting papers whose contents they likely don't understand, presumably spreading to conferences and journals.
- Stanford professor Anshul Kundaje mocked the reported "oral exams" proposal for preprint submissions, saying arXiv has "completely lost the plot"; Rishi Bommasani (Stanford HAI) amplified the debate.
- The exchange highlights the deeper tension between AI-assisted paper flooding and trust mechanisms in scholarly publishing.
Related event: Scholars debate new safeguards as AI-written papers flood arXiv(10 posts)→
More from Research
- Andrew Dai: Next-token prediction scales for language, but video needs a new objective — AndrewDai · 2026-09-15
- Sakana AI's PC-ALM trains 1000-layer nets without backprop; researcher notes 2018 precedent — PMinervini · 2026-09-15
- New paper argues RSI isn't near: agents fail to reproduce unpublished NeurIPS work — we_are_mammals · 2026-09-15
- Proteus paper: incremental memory activation fixes linear attention's fixed-state saturation — behrouz_ali · 2026-09-15
- OM-1 robot foundation model generalizes zero-shot across arms and humanoids from human data — zipengfu · 2026-09-15
- AI agents evolve their own languages: Schmidt Sciences unveils GlossoGen research platform — EliasEskin · 2026-09-15