Economist Paul Novosad decries LLM-written peer reviews as pushing academia to a worse equilibrium
paulnovosad · x · 2026-09-30
Economist Paul Novosad criticized the practice of using LLMs to write peer review reports, arguing that even if individuals privately benefit, it pushes academic reviewing toward a worse equilibrium. He notes people managed to write their own referee reports before 2022 — it was never the hard part — and the norm of writing them yourself should continue.
The exchange highlights a live debate about LLM use in peer review: where to draw the line between AI assistance and AI ghostwriting as adoption spreads.
More from AGI Musings
- Nathan Lambert pushes back on Anthropic: 'Open dangerous, closed safe' is a false dichotomy — natolambert · 2026-09-30
- Report: AI drives up healthcare costs without better care; poster questions insurers — TinfoilTricorn · 2026-09-30
- Musk says AI is becoming essential, cites cases where AI read X-rays right after doctors erred — XFreeze · 2026-09-30
- Prediction: in an agentic world humans won't code, write, or draw — editors have no future — akbirthko · 2026-09-30
- Would you sell your memories to an AI company? A privacy consent dilemma — VraserX · 2026-09-30
- Dean Ball mocks new AI discourse tribe prioritizing 'digital minds hacking' over sci-fi risks — deanwball · 2026-09-30