A popular academic journal is coming down hard on AI-generated submissions
We’re still in the early stages of the AI revolution, but there’s already plenty of evidence that it won’t be purely a blessing. Generative AI has made writing exponentially faster, if not necessarily better, and the result has been a massive increase in submissions of novels, newspaper pieces, and even academic journals, with one publication even warning of a coming “swamp of slop.” Now, however, the journals are fighting back. ArXiv, one of the largest open-access repositories of preprint academic research, is issuing a one-year ban on all authors who submit “obviously AI-generated work,” according to 404media. Moreover, if the offending author wishes to return to the good graces of ArXiv, they will have to first submit to a “reputable peer-reviewed review venue,” according to Thomas Dietterich, chair of the publication’s computer science division. SEE ALSO: The fierce battle over AI in schools He recently took to X to not only clarify the new rules but also place the onus on authors to use LLMs responsibly: “If generative AI tools generate inappropriate language, plagiarized content, …
