Chris 🏳️‍🌈🇨🇦: I know. It’s just as bad because it still lies on someone’s behalf. A bunk paper citing a legitimate individual’s name on a paper or study that doesn’t exist erodes that person’s credibility. The only solution is an absolute ban on any part of a paper being from genAI.

Recently, I was peer reviewing a paper, and it cited one of my papers. Except... it wasn't anything I had written. The title sounds like something I'd write. It included coauthors I work with, and was in a journal I've published in. But it wasn't real. AI is not good for science.

Reminds me of law students using chatGPT only for it to cite court cases that don’t even exist. We’re surrendering to the dissolution of the body of human knowledge. We need bans on this, and AI companies need to stop lying about what LLM even do.

Bans taking what form? As in, treat using these systems as a form of academic dishonesty just like plagiarism?

Bans on using AI to create works in other people’s names. This is as bad as Deepfakes, it harms trust in scientists, public figures

I think this is referring to citations, not whole submissions with fake authors

I know. It’s just as bad because it still lies on someone’s behalf. A bunk paper citing a legitimate individual’s name on a paper or study that doesn’t exist erodes that person’s credibility. The only solution is an absolute ban on any part of a paper being from genAI.

But can people innocently cite a nonexistent paper? There would have to be a fake paper in a fake journal, because course the citer would have to have read the paper. amirite?

Post