Comment by naasking

Comment by naasking 2 days ago

7 replies

So what? People are experimenting with novel tools for review and publication. These restrictions are dumb, people can just ignore reviews and position papers if they start proving to be less useful, and the good ones will eventually spread through word of mouth, just like arxiv has always worked.

me_again 2 days ago

ArXiv has always had a moderation step. The moderators are unable to keep up with the volume of submissions. Accepting these reviews without moderation would be a change to current process, not "just like arXiv has always worked"

  • naasking 2 days ago

    Setting aside the wisdom of moderation, instead of banning AI, use it to accelerate review.

    • wizzwizz4 2 days ago

      Unfortunately, (this kind of) AI doesn't accelerate review. (That's before you get into the ease of producing adversarial inputs: a moderation system not susceptible to these could be wired up backwards as a generation system that produces worthwhile research output, and we don't have one of those.)

      • naasking 16 hours ago

        I'm skeptical: use two different AIs which don't share the same weaknesses + random sample of manual reviews + blacklisting users that submit adversarial inputs for X years as a deterrent.