Thomas G. Dietterich on Twitter / X

Cas (Stephen Casper) on Twitter / X

It is hard to overstate how disappointing I think this new paper from Oxford, OpenAI, Anthropic, and Google (et al) is. I can't take it seriously as academic work, just as propaganda. It also has some very bad scholarship and questionable adherence to research ethics. Having… pic.twitter.com/Z5fBx360ya— Cas (Stephen Casper) (@StephenLCasper) May 13, 2026

Gautam Kamath on Twitter / X

Nihar Shah did a heroic experiment for TMLR: he spent 20-25 hours over two weeks interviewing authors of seemingly low-quality submissions about their own papers. He confirmed what we all suspected: people submitting these papers have *no idea* what is going on in them. https://t.co/6CJF152u7I— Gautam Kamath (@thegautamkamath) September 16, 2026

Mikel Artetxe on Twitter / X

3/4 papers I reviewed and 2/3 reviews I got this ARR cycle were AI slop. Fraudsters are already outnumbering honest researchers. Unless drastic measures are urgently adopted, conference publications will have zero value or even become negative signal, and academia will be toast.— Mikel Artetxe (@artetxem) September 19, 2026

Michael 英泉 Eisen on Twitter / X

ALSO WHY THE FUCK ARE WE STILL JUST CITING PAPERS INSTEAD OF SPECIFIC PIECES OF DATA OR CLAIMS? https://t.co/dngS9d8nOW— Michael 英泉 Eisen (@mbeisen) May 16, 2026

Eric Topol on Twitter / X

This is a FRAUDULENT paper, AI-generated. My name was used as an author and I had nothing to do with it, never saw it until today https://t.co/Ky60zJrMEZThe "Editors" Angelo Rossi Mori, David Mensah, and Zarnie Khadjesari should be reported. pic.twitter.com/2Z5CE8w4bn— Eric Topol (@EricTopol) April 22, 2026

Jason Shepherd on Twitter / X

I have quite a lot of thoughts on this..that won't fit in a tweet. Bottomline is that there are issues scientists in the US would love to improve - faster review, less grant writing, more stability and freedom to do risky science. The folks celebrating this doc are mostly../1 https://t.co/xlPAH9XYNC— Jason Shepherd (@JasonSynaptic) July 23, 2026

Thomas G. Dietterich on Twitter / X

Attention @arxiv authors: Our Code of Conduct states that by signing your name as an author of a paper, each author takes full responsibility for all its contents, irrespective of how the contents were generated. 1/— Thomas G. Dietterich (@tdietterich) May 14, 2026

A Breakdown of arXiv Submissions in Mathematics

Guest post with Daniel Appelo (Virginia Tech)

rohit on Twitter / X

One of the most fun papers I've read in recent times. Excellent. Reminiscent of the good old days of science papers. pic.twitter.com/4a7qRTloSG— rohit (@krishnanrohit) December 30, 2024

Maksym Andriushchenko on Twitter / X

many people seem to be upset by >50k submissions to ICLR. i think we should celebrate it! more people are doing AI (including AI safety) research - isn't it amazing?as for how to navigate the growing amount of papers, luckily, Larry Wasserman formulated a solution back in 2012! pic.twitter.com/U85FGshTqw— Maksym Andriushchenko (@maksym_andr) September 20, 2026

John Horton on Twitter / X

I increasingly think we have to keep AI generated 'papers' out of venues meant for humans---not b/c the papers are bad per se---just that our currently-designed systems cannot accommodate and will break. But I also think what we need a venue for AI generated work (it's good &… pic.twitter.com/fXd92SYbN5— John Horton (@johnjhorton) September 29, 2026

Vipul Gupta on Twitter / X

Feels bad to say, but paper writing/reviewing is definitely cooked.Reviewed 4 papers recently and genuinely felt like I spent more time reviewing them than the authors spent writing them.— Vipul Gupta (@vipul_1011) September 19, 2026

eigenrobot on Twitter / X

i've found i lately enjoy reading essays by carefully-prompted LLMs more than i enjoy nearly any contemporary human-constructed outputhm. @shakoistsLog this seems dangerous in several directions https://t.co/fenRaPVKnB pic.twitter.com/2LTxXhHdXJ— eigenrobot (@eigenrobot) August 12, 2026

Shreya Shankar on Twitter / X

This problem has gotten significantly worse. As Twitter and other social media have become primary channels for sharing research, academics are now expected to make the same ideas legible and appealing to both the general public (to go "viral") and senior scholars (to get the… https://t.co/zPF3tKzbVa— Shreya Shankar (@sh_reya) July 25, 2026

Dan Singleton 🏳️‍🌈🏳️‍⚧️ on Twitter / X

1. Ok, this is the thread to end all threads, or possibly my career. I am about to trash a new paper in @sciencemagazine, its editors, its reviewers, C&E News, others who stated or wrote adoring commentaries, anyone who looked at the paper or its commentaries without seeing pic.twitter.com/K5O1cX1BJP— Dan Singleton 🏳️‍🌈🏳️‍⚧️ (@dasingleton) April 8, 2019