← Back to context

Comment by bobmarleybiceps

13 hours ago

A recent review of mine had a LLM-ism at the very end, "would you like me to format this into a formal peer review report?" So they very likely copy-pasted their whole review :). I'm pretty down on academia atm ;-;

7 comments

bobmarleybiceps

Reply
coolness  7 hours ago

Super unfortunate. On the other side, I reviewed four papers for a top-tier AI conference and three were clearly fully Claude generated, as in all text, figures, results, everything. Actual good reviewer time is wasted on such papers and your (i hope) human written good paper receives AI responses. It's a sad state of affairs for sure.

  • stingraycharles  2 hours ago

    I find it incredibly sad that this is what the world is becoming, and I mostly blame people for this, not the LLMs.

    It’s the same type of people that would have no issue letting an LLM open a pull request on GitHub wasting valuable time of other humans, and whatnot.

    I’m using LLMs all the time myself, but it’s so incredibly important to use it to improve the quality of your work, not degrade it. People seem to be totally oblivious about this.

    On the flip side, it does make it easier to recognize people who are wasting my time.

Skyy93  13 hours ago

I think this is more of a systematic issue. I review now since 2-3 years, I do not get paid, which is fine. However, it takes always a huge amount of time without really having anything from it, but I do it because it is important work.

There now so many researcher that need to publish which explains the flooding, LLM only speed it up, so reciprocal reviews take place. So now you are forced to review and you are having less and less time. So it’s a natural choice for you if you already took an LLM to write a paper to use it to review.

Perhaps one solution would be much harder entry barriers, and enforcing some guidelines. For example that a supervisor can not have more than 5 papers and PhD students only need one real paper on a major conference/journal.

baq  9 hours ago

You’d better not look at the average CI pipeline in software shops then