ArXiv to Ban Researchers for a Year If They Submit AI Slop
ArXiv will impose a one-year ban on researchers who submit AI-generated content without proper oversight. The policy targets submissions with clear signs of unreviewed AI output, such as hallucinated references or meta-comments from large language models. Authors must then have future work accepted by a peer-reviewed venue before resubmitting to ArXiv.
- ▪ArXiv will ban authors for one year if they submit work with clear evidence of unchecked AI generation.
- ▪Incontrovertible evidence includes hallucinated references and meta-comments left in by large language models.
- ▪Thomas Dietterich, chair of the computer science section at ArXiv, announced the policy on X.
- ▪The ban is followed by a requirement that future submissions be accepted at reputable peer-reviewed venues first.
- ▪Examples of problematic content include inappropriate language, plagiarism, bias, errors, and incorrect references generated by AI.
Opening excerpt (first ~120 words) tap to expand
ArXiv, the open-access repository of preprint academic research, will ban authors of papers for a year if they submit obviously AI-generated work. Late Thursday evening, Thomas Dietterich, chair of the computer science section of ArXiv, wrote on X: “If generative AI tools generate inappropriate language, plagiarized content, biased content, errors, mistakes, incorrect references, or misleading content, and that output is included in scientific works, it is the responsibility of the author(s). We have recently clarified our penalties for this.
…
Excerpt limited to ~120 words for fair-use compliance. The full article is at 404 Media.
Discussion
0 commentsMore from 404 Media
