Send the arXiv AI-generated slop, get a yearlong vacation from submissions

The scientific preprint server arXiv is taking a firm stance against the submission of AI-generated content that fails to meet scholarly standards. This move comes as AI-produced "slop," including fake citations and nonsensical diagrams, has increasingly appeared in academic submissions. The new policy aims to curb the spread of such material.

Thomas Dietterich, an emeritus professor at Oregon State University and a member of arXiv's editorial advisory council, announced the updated policy. He emphasized that all authors are responsible for the content of their manuscripts and must adhere to "appropriate standards of scholarly communication."

Under the new rules, any submission found to contain inappropriate AI-generated material will lead to severe penalties. All listed authors will face a one-year ban from submitting to arXiv. Furthermore, any future manuscripts from these authors will only be accepted after they have successfully undergone peer review by a journal.

For scientific fields heavily reliant on arXiv for sharing preprints, these sanctions are significant. The platform is crucial for early dissemination and feedback, making a submission ban a considerable impediment to researchers' work. The policy underscores the importance of careful preparation and ethical conduct in academic publishing.