Re: [TYPES] AI-generated conference submissions

[ The Types Forum, http://lists.seas.upenn.edu/mailman/listinfo/types-list ]

On Tue, 17 Mar 2026 at 01:52, Stephanie Balzer
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
> [ The Types Forum, http://lists.seas.upenn.edu/mailman/listinfo/types-list  ]
>
> I have now been numerous times on the receiving end on a what it appears
> to me (almost) entirely AI-generated conference submissions that I was
> assigned to review.  Of course I have no proof, but to me it was pretty
> obvious.  The submissions in question consist of an amalgamation of
> meaningful words (sometimes not entirely from the context the paper
> ought to be about), are generally well written, although meaningless,
> and even come backed up with some rules with horizontal lines and proof
> sketches (sometimes from various contexts).  That catch, however, is
> that the whole composition doesn't make sense.
>
> What are we going to do about this as a community?

How about teaching people on how to write good academic English, which
is not only about proper English grammar but having good ideas and
focus on them and elaborate them? Also, teaching them research ethics,
showing themselves in writing, what they have done, not what others
have done, including using others' work transformed by generative
artificial intelligence. A good reviewer will recognise genuine
interesting ideas and will help to polish the exposition.

- Gergely