arXiv Clarifies Author Responsibility for AI-Generated Content
نظرة سريعة
- arXiv now holds authors fully responsible for AI-generated content in their submissions, including errors and plagiarism.
- Violators face a 1-year ban and mandatory peer-review acceptance for future submissions.
ملخص مُنشأ بالذكاء الاصطناعي
لماذا يهم
arXiv has updated its policies regarding author responsibility for content generated by artificial intelligence tools. The platform emphasizes that authors are accountable for all aspects of their submissions, regardless of how the content was produced.
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.
If generative AI tools generate inappropriate language, plagiarized content, biased content, errors, mistakes, incorrect references, or misleading content, and that output is included in scientific works, it is the responsibility of the author(s).
We have recently clarified our penalties for this. If a submission contains incontrovertible evidence that the authors did not check the results of LLM generation, this means we can’t trust anything in the paper.
The penalty is a 1-year ban from arXiv followed by the requirement that subsequent arXiv submissions must first be accepted at a reputable peer-reviewed venue.
Examples of incontrovertible evidence: hallucinated references, meta-comments from the LLM (“here is a 200 word summary; would you like me to make any changes?”; “the data in this table is illustrative, fill it in with the real numbers from your experiments”)
أسئلة مفتوحة
- How will arXiv verify incontrovertible evidence of unchecked LLM generation?
- What constitutes a 'reputable peer-reviewed venue' for future submissions?
- Will there be an appeals process for the imposed penalties?
