Research repository ArXiv will ban authors for a year if they let AI do all the work

ArXiv, a widely used open repository for preprint research, is cracking down on the careless use of large language models (LLMs) in scientific papers. This move addresses a growing concern about the quality of submissions and the integrity of scientific discourse. Despite being a platform for pre-peer-reviewed papers, ArXiv has become a crucial source of data and a primary channel for research dissemination in fields like computer science and mathematics.

The repository has already introduced measures such as requiring first-time submitters to secure an endorsement from an established author. Now, in a more significant step, ArXiv’s computer science section chair, Thomas Dietterich, announced a new policy. If a submission shows "incontrovertible evidence" that authors did not vet LLM-generated results, they will face severe penalties.

Such evidence includes "hallucinated references" or direct comments to or from the LLM within the paper. The penalty for such infractions is a one-year ban from ArXiv. Following the ban, any future submissions must first be accepted by a reputable peer-reviewed venue before they can be posted on the platform.

Dietterich clarified that this policy is not an outright prohibition on using LLMs. Instead, it emphasizes that authors bear "full responsibility" for their content, regardless of its generation method. This means authors are accountable for any inappropriate language, plagiarism, bias, errors, or misleading information copied directly from an LLM.

The new rule will operate on a "one-strike" basis, but only after moderators flag the issue and section chairs confirm the evidence. Authors will have the right to appeal these decisions. This proactive stance by ArXiv highlights the academic community's increasing efforts to maintain research quality and integrity amidst the evolving landscape of AI assistance.