Post B4vGLvSHDAax9kLBOi by azonenberg@ioc.exchange
 (DIR) More posts by azonenberg@ioc.exchange
 (DIR) Post #B4vGLvSHDAax9kLBOi by azonenberg@ioc.exchange
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       Just finished reading through a paper I'm peer-reviewing for [redacted publication].I'm about 90% sure it was mostly or entirely LLM slop. Filled with inconsistencies, broken [?] citations, bizarre punctuation, and things that made no sense.What a waste of time.
       
 (DIR) Post #B4vGPdiX6OGDIliPfU by azonenberg@ioc.exchange
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       I recommended it for rejection before even bothering to go look up the bibliography and see if the papers it was citing were real. But based on how the text read, it wouldn't surprise me if at least one citation was hallucinated.
       
 (DIR) Post #B4vIIFr1cqzdAnIHgG by litchralee_v6@ipv6.social
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @azonenberg On the chance that you might be familiar with the whole process, do papers sent for peer-review also get sent to a copyeditor or similar, in addition to subject matter experts? I've always wondered whether journals will first send a candidate paper to someone that does basic validation (eg grammar, sensible diagrams, etc) or if they are just dispatching it as-is to the reviewers and hope they'll catch both the small and large issues.