Researcher's paper rejected 2/2/3/2 — Pangram flags 3 of 4 reviews as 100% AI-generated
nsaphra · x · 2026-11-06
Researcher nsaphra reports that a paper she considered possibly her most practically impactful work received review scores of 2/2/3/2 and was rejected. Running the four reviews through the AI detector Pangram, 3 out of 4 were flagged as 100% AI-generated (the shortest review was itself short and mostly AI-written). She laments that the community likely can't afford to ban such reviewers from refereeing, highlighting growing concerns about AI-contaminated peer review.
More from Fun
- Researcher's take: if you have a concrete plan, it isn't novel enough — wavefnx · 2026-11-06
- Alpine Linux bug lets you get root by typing 257 random characters — burny_tech · 2026-11-06
- Anthropic's Grady mascot teases mystery studio shoot with #whereisgrady — sarahookr · 2026-11-06
- AI-generated 'naked mole-rat driving a convertible, 1960' stuns with photoreal texture — Megalania34 · 2026-11-06
- Agents wrote a polished F1 champions site via multi-model rounds, cloning a Deimos-style build — evilrabbit_ · 2026-11-06
- evilsocket mocks laid-off dev who blames AI: 'probably never worked a complex codebase' — evilsocket · 2026-11-06