• Squizzy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    9 days ago

    Those authors should be screened loads forever more. They do not respect the purpose of the scientific process if they are solely trying to push themselves forward.

      • MysteriousSophon21@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        7 days ago

        This is the biggest issue - peer review is supposed to be about critical analysis and domain expertise, not just following promts blindly, and no AI today has actual scientific understanding to catch subtle methodological flaws.

      • Squizzy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        8 days ago

        Yeah absolutely, but researchers who are attempting skirt review processes to only receice positive feedback are not respecting the process.

        • CrypticCoffee@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          6 days ago

          What’s to respect in an AI review where they didn’t even review the output. It’s an LLM lazy review. Deserves to be gamed.

          • Squizzy@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            5 days ago

            Yes, the reviewers should not be using it. The researcher shouldnt be submitting it with the intention of gaming it.

            AI is not all LLM chat bots, there are legitimate AI implementations used in research.