Arxiv Imposes 1-Year Ban for AI-Generated Papers With Fabricated Citations
Updated
Updated · Computerworld · May 19
Arxiv Imposes 1-Year Ban for AI-Generated Papers With Fabricated Citations
7 articles · Updated · Computerworld · May 19
A single flagged submission can now trigger a one-year Arxiv suspension if it shows obvious AI-generated errors or fabricated content, according to new platform rules reported by 404 Media.
Red flags include made-up sources, incorrect citations and leftover AI comments—signs, Arxiv said, that authors failed to properly review machine-generated text before submitting it as research.
Suspended users can appeal a proposed ban, but if the penalty stands, future Arxiv submissions will require prior acceptance by a reputable peer-reviewed scientific journal.
The crackdown targets a rising flow of AI-written manuscripts that present themselves as legitimate scientific work on the preprint server, where papers appear before formal peer review.
With AI flooding academia with 'slop,' is Arxiv's ban a cure or just a symptom of a broken 'publish or perish' system?
Can advanced AI that promises zero 'hallucinations' save scientific research, or does it just deepen our reliance on unaccountable black boxes?