Story
I flagged two research papers for fake authors and both were accepted as orals
1 report
1 website
1 discussion
Latest report
Overview
Of 22 paper submissions reviewed from NeurIPS, WACV, and TerraBytes, 15 (68%) included fabricated citations, fake author lists, or content generated by language models that displayed hallucinated technical jargon and irrelevant citations. This phenomenon is referred to as being in the "slop trenches," indicating challenges in handling low-quality AI-generated outputs.
Summary from geospatialml.com.
Reports
One report so far. Additional coverage will appear here when it is linked to this story.
Community reactions
Each reaction summarizes sampled comments from the linked discussion.
Hacker News · geospatialml.com
Historical count: 5 · 5 saved in sample · Historical sample
Analysis ready
Read this discussion’s reaction
Based on 5 sampled comments from this thread. Analyzed 2026-07-31.
- Praise: The trend of AI reviewing papers is fascinating, suggesting a future where AI could streamline the academic process — but is it really ready for prime time?
- Praise: Open accessibility to papers could drastically reduce the validation issues we're seeing, making research more accountable and transparent.
- Concern: We're rapidly automating the production of junk research, and AI still can't judge quality — it's a recipe for disaster.
- Concern: If AI takes over the publication process, it risks making academia irrelevant and could lead to a return to elitist cliques in research.