AI-generated journal submissions up 5-10x in a year; 90% not worth reviewing
menhguin · x · 2026-10-07
- The author notes AI-generated journal submissions have grown 5-10x in the past year; the vast majority are slop, and 90% aren't worth human review time.
- His take: mechanically, AI can pump out high-quantity, high-quality research, but current models still depend heavily on human research direction.
- Conclusion: human discretion remains a net positive and is key to building genuinely useful automated research.
More from AGI Musings
- Researcher predicts AI will solve every Millennium Problem and absorb all of mathematics — basedjensen · 2026-10-07
- Ofir Press imagines coding breakthroughs: doing what people thought would take 100 years — OfirPress · 2026-10-07
- 'Solve real problems' critique of OpenAI math models gets a sharp rebuttal — basedjensen · 2026-10-07
- 'Wake me up when AI cures cancer' — why dismissive takes on AI progress miss the point — basedjensen · 2026-10-07
- Are programming languages suboptimal for agents? Devs debate a coming compiler/OS rethink — peterjliu · 2026-10-07
- Yacine: posttraining is just the rich man's inference — yacineMTB · 2026-10-07