31 comments

[ 0.16 ms ] story [ 14.9 ms ] thread
it happens all the time - it's bad, but i wonder if it is newsworthy anymore. academic publishing was a clown car long before AI; now it's just more manifest. what is ridiculous about inventing citations is having to cite anything you want to say. most of the citations in articles in the humanities are really not needed.
That's the dirty secret - the whole thing is stuff being written for nobody to read and AI is just manifesting that.
It appears that even the “authors” don’t read it.
except it is all a clown car.
> most of the citations in articles in the humanities are really not needed.

Um, no, that is entirely wrong.

Citations are always mandatory.

Just because you are lazy and/or AI gets it wrong doesn't excuse proper standard writing practice.

[flagged]
- journals argue pay walls pay for peer review and are concerned about shadow libraries to train AI

- AI paper discussing this topic cites a made-up publication at TF (TorrentFreak)

- TF looks closer and sees that 10/44 citations are suspect in said paper

- journal published paper without thorough peer review

chef's kiss

This account is an LLM karmabot
The mischievous part of me wonders what would happen if torrentfreak wrote a matching article, with content that messes with the paper...
They couyld have indeed presented data that only AIs would scrape or notice... which would be entirely legitimate on their part to do.

My own website spews bogus content and misinformation about almost any topic to misconfigured scrapers. I expect to eventually see it in some training sets.

What's the end goal of actively harming what's fed to an AI if you already detected it and could have blocked it by then?
"Actively harming" is a technically true and also legitmately crazy way to frame this.
They feel harmed by the AI companies training AI on their data so they feel retaliation is justified.
More like I’m just annoyed at them not respecting robots.txt on a site that has nothing of value for them.
How would one implement that?
For a while I just did markov chains. Now I use it as an experiment to use agents to generate plausible yet pointless websites.
Do you just show a different page to scrappers? How do you know they are misconfigured? I would like to implement something similar
Well, the only proper use of some of the sites is an audience of a half dozen people who know the correct login page.
Papers with claims that don't match their citations aren't a new phenomenon, so probably nothing.
Using slot machine technology to hallucinate a fake paper is new though.
[dead]
It's because a poorly written article can easily trick an AI into missing the critical points when it tries to summarize it. Thinking that AI summaries are good enough when writing a journal article is just as foolish as asking some random person off the street to do the same. AI can be very helpful but please don't publish AI slop like this guy.
Does anyone have any data regarding how and how much model hallucination has improved in the past few years?
Why the f*ck would authors fail to check everything unless they were just being lazy. Its one thing to get assistance. It is totally another to give up all responsibility when you use AI. I wouldn't trust anything they did with or without AI.
Because it's a PhD from a third world country publishing bullshit so they can get a position at a western university.
Yes because PhDs from western countries don't lazily publish AI generated research at all. No wait they do. There was no need to bring up the authors country of origin as being "third world"
Kinda yes, but... it's like all those Nigerian scams. Yes, people outside of Nigeria can do them too, and sometimes they do. And yet.

Similarly, PhDs from Africa or China... if you work in a scientific journal, you know what I mean.

Maybe let someone write it - if such article shall exist ?