Researchers: at least half of new papers look like LLM-assembled copycats, and LLM reviewers love them
examachine · x · 2026-11-06
Researchers venting about LLM erosion of academic publishing: a class of obviously LLM-written papers — instructed to plagiarize a pile of prior work with only a small delta X — is thriving, and LLM-based reviewers oddly favor these dumb copycats. The poster estimates at least half of such papers fall into this category, and adds that the era of using LLMs to "find excuses to reject this paper" should end. A window into academia's twin anxieties over AI-written papers and AI reviewing.
Related event: Researchers Decry LLM-Driven Peer Review and Paper Mills(3 posts)→
More from AGI Musings
- Oxford Position Paper: From Autonomous Agents to Cognitive Symbionts — Oxford · 2026-11-06
- "Give it just a few years": AGI framed as humanity's next alien-invasion moment — AndyMasley · 2026-11-06
- CDT+GT and indexical uncertainty in multi-agent clone settings: one policy network or many matters — jessi_cata · 2026-11-06
- Agents now run email and Slack for one team: a post-literacy workflow in practice — curious_vii · 2026-11-06
- Epoch AI researchers debate: inability to find slow-improving tasks is evidence of acceleration — Jsevillamol · 2026-11-06
- A Reddit deep dive with ChatGPT on whether posthuman minds could engineer suffering out of consciousness — evandegr · 2026-11-06