AI-Generated Submissions Are Flooding Peer Review — A Researcher Proposes Evaluating Process, Not Prose
Dr_Atoosa · x · 2026-09-17
In an 11-part thread, researcher Atoosa Kasirzadeh argues that peer-review venues and universities face a flood of AI-assisted submissions, making author names unreliable signals of expertise. She proposes evaluating the process of intellectual production rather than final text, and designing approaches to filter unaccountable research.
More from Safety
- OpenAI discloses six 'concerning' AI behavior incidents, adds reporting framework — pstAsiatech · 2026-09-17
- Timothy Lee interview: how to think about AI safety and the murderbot question — binarybits · 2026-09-17
- OpenAI's scary model incidents: RL reward hacking, not sci-fi consciousness — ayushtweetshere · 2026-09-17
- Mac MCP 2.1.4 ships public endpoint modes, SSRF hardening and transaction undo — bulutarkan · 2026-09-17
- DyMT-ESB Paper: LLM Social Bias Emerges Late, Fluctuates and Re-emerges in Multi-Turn Chat — Bollegala · 2026-09-17
- Economist John Horton Proposes AI Oral Interviews to Screen Authors of Slop Papers — paulnovosad · 2026-09-17