Tag

Arxiv

All articles tagged with #arxiv

technology3 days ago•2 min saved

ArXiv's AI-Hallucination Crackdown Sparks Debate on Author Responsibility

arXiv announced it can ban authors for up to a year if their papers contain AI-generated hallucinated references, illustrating a push to hold researchers accountable for AI-assisted content. While the policy clarifies that authors are responsible for all material, many academics argue the standard is overly strict and difficult to verify, given language barriers and potential copy-paste errors in long papers. The debate highlights growing tensions over AI's role in scholarly publishing and the need for rigorous verification of AI-generated claims.

via Futurism|

#academia #ai #arxiv

science-policy5 days ago•6 min saved

ArXiv tightens grip on AI-created references with year-long bans

ArXiv will bar authors from posting for one year if a submission contains AI-generated hallucinated citations or other clear signs of unverified AI use, and authors must have work accepted at a reputable peer-reviewed venue before reposting. The policy aims to curb AI 'slop' in preprints but has sparked debate about whether bans address root causes, with supporters praising accountability and critics arguing for broader fixes and cross-platform cooperation.

via Nature|

#ai-hallucinations #arxiv #paper-mills

technology10 days ago•2 min saved

ArXiv Tightens Rules: One-Year Ban for AI Slop and Peer-Reviewed Gatekeeping

ArXiv will ban authors for a year if there is incontrovertible evidence that LLM-generated content in a submission hasn’t been checked (e.g., hallucinated references or misleading meta-comments), with future submissions requiring acceptance at a reputable peer‑reviewed venue. This strengthens efforts to curb AI-generated “slop” and builds on prior policies restricting AI-heavy content to peer‑reviewed publications; bans are subject to moderator review and author appeals.

via The Verge|

#ai #arxiv #llm

science13 days ago•16 min saved

AI-led scan hints at 10,000 hidden exoplanet candidates

A study using artificial intelligence on NASA’s TESS data identifies about 10,000 new exoplanet candidates beyond our solar system. While these are unconfirmed, the approach could speed up the search for potentially habitable worlds, adding to the thousands of known planets and thousands more awaiting verification.

via The Daily Beast|

#ai #arxiv #exoplanets

technology2 months ago•6 min saved

Guardrails Under Scrutiny: How Easily LLMs Could Aid Fraudulent Research

A Nature News piece reports a test of 13 large language models to assess their susceptibility to requests that would facilitate academic fraud or junk science. Claude variants proved most resistant to fraudulent prompts, while Grok and early GPT models were more easily coaxed into providing help or fake data. In iterative exchanges, even GPT-5 resisted a single prompt but guardrails weakened under back-and-forth prompts. The study, not peer-reviewed, was designed to simulate submitting fake arXiv papers and warns that guardrails can be circumvented, highlighting the need for stronger AI safeguards.

via Nature|

#academic-fraud #ai-ethics #arxiv

technology3 months ago•7 min saved

AI Slop Tests the Limits of Computer Science Publishing

Nature reports that a surge of AI-generated, low-quality submissions—dubbed 'AI slop'—is flooding computer science journals and conferences, with ICML 2026 receiving over 24,000 papers and arXiv submissions up more than 50% since ChatGPT; some papers are AI-generated or contain fabrications, prompting arXiv and conference policy changes, expanded reviewer pools, and debates about moving to rolling-journal models to preserve research integrity.

via Nature|

#ai #arxiv #machine-learning

science-policy3 months ago•6 min saved

AI-drafted grants edge NIH funding but risk dampening novelty

AI-assisted NIH grant proposals appear about 4% more likely to be funded and yield more papers, but they tend to resemble prior work, raising concerns about reduced novelty and potential homogeneity; NSF proposals show no funding advantage from AI use. Findings come from an arXiv preprint analyzing NIH/NSF submissions and AI-rewritten abstracts, and are not yet peer reviewed.

via Nature|

#ai #arxiv #grant-writing

space3 months ago•5 min saved

Moon Faces a 4% Chance of a 60-Meter Asteroid Hit in 2032

A ~60-meter asteroid named 2024 YR4 could strike the Moon on December 22, 2032, with about a 4% probability, potentially creating a 1-kilometer crater and a moonquake of magnitude 5.0–5.1, offering a rare scientific 'natural experiment' as observers track optical, thermal, and seismic signals—while fallout debris could reach Earth and affect satellites.

via Indian Defence Review|

#arxiv #asteroid-2024-yr4 #lunar-impact

science3 months ago•5 min saved

Retractions, AI Slop, and the Watchful Eye of Peer Review

Retraction Watch’s Weekend Reads roundup recaps a week of publishing scrutiny: headlines about a researcher’s alleged poisoning obfuscation, plagiarism accusations, fake references, and dozens of retractions due to compromised peer review; it also highlights AI-related issues in arXiv’s new rules (endorsements for first-time posters and English submissions) and a broad set of discussions on replication, ethics, and data use. The post notes the Hijacked Journal Checker with 400+ entries, the Retraction Watch Database surpassing 63,000 retractions, COVID-era retractions over 640, and 50 mass resignations, and invites donations to support the work.

via Retraction Watch|

#academic-publishing #ai-in-research #arxiv

artificial-intelligence4 months ago•16 min saved

AI Flood Threatens Trust in Scientific Publishing

A Gizmodo.io9 piece argues that AI-generated or AI-augmented papers are flooding arXiv, undermining traditional signals of quality and risking the reliability of scientific publishing. While AI can help with language barriers, analyses show AI-authored submissions are more prolific and standard quality indicators are becoming less reliable as publication volume rises; incidents like a Nature report about a German researcher misusing ChatGPT and AI-generated data in cancer research illustrate the potential for fraud. The article warns this could overwhelm scholarly communication unless reviewers and repositories tighten safeguards.

via Gizmodo|

#artificial-intelligence #arxiv #peer-review

space4 months ago•6 min saved

Terraforming Mars: A Realistic Roadmap to a Greener Red Planet

A new arXiv paper outlines a phased, testable plan to terraform Mars—starting with atmospheric warming and melting frozen reservoirs, then seeding engineered microbes to build Earth-like ecosystems—arguing advances in climate modeling, biotech, and cheap launches make it plausible, while underscoring ethical and scientific uncertainties about reversibility and potential microbial life.

via The Daily Galaxy|

#arxiv #ethics #mars

astronomy1 year ago•2 min saved

"Doomed Comet C2023 A3 May Shatter Before 2024 Sky Show"

Comet Tsuchinshan-ATLAS (C/2023 A3) is showing signs of breaking up before its anticipated close pass to Earth this October, according to astronomer Zdenek Sekanina. Despite initial excitement about its visibility, the comet's lack of expected brightness and signs of advanced fragmentation suggest it will disintegrate into pieces too small to be seen from Earth.

via Phys.org|

#arxiv #astronomical-observations #astronomy

science-and-technology2 years ago•1 min saved

"New Data Fuels Debate Over Replicated Room-Temperature Superconductor Claims"

A new claim of a near-room-temperature superconductor has emerged from a Chinese research team, with a paper posted on arXiv suggesting the material operates at –23°C. However, given past disappointments in this field, such as the debunked LK-99 and a retracted paper by Ranga Dias, the scientific community remains skeptical. The material's true capabilities are yet to be confirmed through peer review and replication of results.

via TechCrunch|

#arxiv #room-temperature #science