The rapid development of artificial intelligence (AI) technology has dealt a severe blow to literary creation and the judging mechanisms of literary awards. Well-known author Chu Yu-hsun posted today revealing that this year was his most painful year serving as a literary award judge, estimating that among the hundreds to over a thousand short story submissions he reviewed, as many as 40 percent were created using AI. He admitted that the literary community is using limited human bodies to resist an infinitely reproducible industrial production line, and that working conditions have completely collapsed. He announced that starting next year, if a literary award's regulations do not explicitly state "AI creation is prohibited," he will refuse all judging invitations without exception.
Writing on Facebook today, Chu Yu-hsun pointed out a significant difference in AI submissions between the first and second halves of this year's judging work alone. Many times, he had to read through an entire batch of works before realizing a new AI writing pattern had emerged because "a certain similar style appeared too many times." He described that while preliminary judging used to require only selecting outstanding works, now judges must rank entries while simultaneously discerning "whether it was written by a human"—akin to a pitcher throwing three balls at once in baseball, two of which are illusions, requiring the batter to first verify which one is real before swinging.
Chu Yu-hsun admitted that perceptually, if 20 AI works are mixed into 200 submissions, the mental effort required feels like reading four or five hundred pieces. The existing system is doomed to destroy the quality of review and cannot effectively defend against it. He stated frankly that from a professional practitioner's perspective, the working conditions of reviewing manuscripts have completely collapsed, and remuneration needs to be substantially increased to restore quality; otherwise, every literary award is destined to be riddled with flaws.
Chu Yu-hsun also announced that starting next year, when faced with all literary award judging invitations, he will first check whether there is an "AI creation prohibited" clause in the rules. If there are no relevant terms, he will refuse them all. If the organizers have more proactive prevention measures (such as requiring contestants to sign an affidavit or preserve their creative logs), he will prioritize participating. "This is no longer about my view of literature; it is purely to prevent myself from dying of overwork."
Chu Yu-hsun said he might also misjudge—possibly treating non-AI works as AI, or letting AI works slip through the cracks—and even if his accuracy rate were as high as 95%, he would still misjudge 50 out of 1,000 works.
Addressing contestants who use AI to submit entries, Chu Yu-hsun issued a harsh warning: "I know it is useless to try to persuade you, because you simply do not possess the talent and soul of a creator to begin with, so you will not have a creator's pride and self-demands." He could only say that as long as they continue using AI to submit entries, this system will soon be ruined. "Treasure your last few opportunities to deceive your way into prize money. The day the literary award system collapses, you won't even be able to find a doorway for 'where to submit entries' or 'where to be seen.'"
