AI-and-PhD research is open to interpretation, authors caution
paulnovosad · x · 2026-11-11
Daniel Gross cautions that the AI-in-PhD-writing research admits multiple interpretations: AI may serve non-native English speakers for translation, which could be fine or problematic given English-language publishing norms.
The career-outcome evidence is correlational only — reliance on AI could disqualify students from academia, or industry-bound students may just take an easy route with AI. Causality could run either way.
Related event: Study finds nearly 30% of US STEM dissertations have AI-generated abstracts(5 posts)→
More from AGI Musings
- The worst AI use signals you don't care about things you should care about — Afinetheorem · 2026-11-12
- Worst AI use: signaling you don't care about things you should — Afinetheorem · 2026-11-12
- Stanford HAI blueprint: 56 US agencies report 3,611 AI use cases, evaluation lags — StanfordHAI · 2026-11-12
- Fleuret amplifies debate: AI can't slash wet-lab experiments in unmapped biology — francoisfleuret · 2026-11-12
- Recursive bets on open-endedness: agents running massive parallel experiments like scientist communities — agihouse_org · 2026-11-12
- Recursive's Tim Shi maps recursive self-improvement: from learning data to discovering architectures — agihouse_org · 2026-11-12