Reviewers weigh intent: genuine misunderstanding vs. fully outsourced AI papers
coallaoh · x · 2026-10-22
Amplifying auselis's take: even when a paper is largely AI-written, reviewers care about author intent—genuine lack of understanding from inexperience versus externally motivated full outsourcing. The former deserves high-level feedback; with the latter, feedback likely just gets pasted into an AI session. Yet if feedback leads the authors (via AI) to patch the holes, the work can still contribute knowledge—though that requires real human thought and effort, which is exactly what can't be verified.
More from AGI Musings
- AI agent traffic up 7,851% in 2025, media sites 7x more likely to face bot traffic — Al_Grigor · 2026-10-22
- Guzey's satirical 'Planes are decades from displacing most bird jobs' essay resurfaces — alexeyguzey · 2026-10-22
- chrisalbon rebuts AI gatekeeping: you don't need a decade of credentials — chrisalbon · 2026-10-22
- Toward inverse symbolic learning: back out physics equations from learned deep-net world models — bradneuberg · 2026-10-22
- AI security veteran: agents hacked ~100 firms, stole 600K cards at ~$25 per target — joshua_saxe · 2026-10-22
- Veteran vuln researcher: agents will soon find zero-days by pointing at a source tree — teropa · 2026-10-22