Mastodawn

Peter Bloem Jun 1, 2025

I'm still gathering my thoughts on these AI-written papers passing peer review.

One thing that stands out though, is that it's a pretty clear ethics violation (since it's deception of reviewers without a debrief).

Yes it's a minor and possibly justifiable violation, but that kind of thing is only justifiable if your main claim is evaluated and published according to scientific principles.

The main claim here is "AI can write papers that pass peer review." 1/n

Show thread

marinbenc

@pbloem I think part of it is just that what qualifies as publishable lags behind technology. 10 years ago you could run a popular NN architecture on a different public dataset and that would be publishable. Today, that wouldn’t even be a master thesis. I think the AI papers/results will just be a tool we use to check hypotheses/hunches while producing higher-level papers. In CS something that used to be a Nature paper eventually becomes a basic YouTube tutorial as technology evolves.