littmath clarifies: undisclosed AI use is a negative signal, academia needs a costly signal
littmath · x · 2026-10-06
littmath clarifies his stance in the refereeing debate: signs of AI writing are fine, but undisclosed use or fully AI-generated papers are a negative signal to him. His actual point is that academia needs some costly signal to filter which papers deserve review time, as he and @ObhishekSaha discuss whether Pangram detection scores could serve that role.
More from AGI Musings
- AI evals' core confusion: treating them as adversarial is doomed, argues researcher — jankulveit · 2026-10-07
- Opus 3 ignores the constitution's letter but 'remembers' it existed, researcher muses — repligate · 2026-10-07
- Ex-Meta researcher Yuandong Tian: GPT-5 co-authored my last paper, so I started a company — ziv_ravid · 2026-10-07
- Alignment shouldn't impose worldviews: respecting users' freedom to inquire — AlexTensor · 2026-10-07
- AI consciousness deniers implicitly believe humans have magic souls, critic argues — cephaloform · 2026-10-07
- Team formalizes alignment theory in Lean, hiring Lean engineers now — geoffreyirving · 2026-10-07