I'm a group about AcademicChatter. Follow me to get all the group posts. Tag me to share with the group. Create other groups by searching for or tagging @[email protected]
> "Literally the only other solution I can envision is to force LLM manufacturers to pay a significant tax to subsidize the journal review system that they are about to destroy."
Just charge a reading fee for each submitted article. This nonsense would stop overnight. And blacklist any author caught plagiarizing via 'AI' toolchains. If something comes from an AI the AI should be cited in the references, something like:
[AI][chatENG] ... or ... [AI:chatENG] ...
@firefly AI is not the only problem. The fact those articles got published is merely a symptom of a far larger problem, mostly created by the combination of carreers depending on number of publications and for-profit scientific publishers. Even without AI many publications contribute nothing. I have seen people reinvent linear models as a "powerful new method".
The extent of this is probably much greater than you have uncovered here.
@[email protected] @[email protected]
I think back to these hoaxes, which con-artists invented to convince people that evolution is real:
Piltdown Man
Lucy
Archaeopteryx
Brontosaurus
And other "scientific" hoaxes which will get me banned from the soviet-controlled, fedposter-infested, censorship-friendly fediverse if I even name them ...
Publish or perish ...?
@firefly I don't know if @academicchatter can set blocks, but with only 1 right out of 4, your post does sound rather off-topic:
[1] known fraud: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piltdown_Man
[2] generally accepted: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lucy_%28Australopithecus%29
[3] #FredHoyle and #LeeSpetner suspected forgery, but the palaeontologists' consensus is that it's real: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archaeopteryx#Authenticity
[4] generally accepted: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brontosaurus