I bitched about this during ICA reviews. But it sucks so much to review papers that are heavy in AI. I'm now on hour 7 or so of this paper. I have a million other things to do. Do the authors that do this realize how much collective time they are wasting? - ThreadSky

katypearce.bsky.social • 39 days ago

I bitched about this during ICA reviews. But it sucks so much to review papers that are heavy in AI. I'm now on hour 7 or so of this paper. I have a million other things to do. Do the authors that do this realize how much collective time they are wasting?

Comments

claresoutherton.bsky.social•39 days ago

Completely agree, if they can’t be bothered to write it, why would I want to read it?? I find AI text so empty and it seems to be talking about talking about talking about the thing.

aurman21.bsky.social•39 days ago

Curious: how do you tell it's AI? I think I didn't have any of those within a year (ok, one case when I can remember that I was quite sure it was AI heavy). So either I am lucky or I am just AI blind, so curious what signs do you rely on?

katypearce.bsky.social•38 days ago

Weird references, sometimes fake, sometimes just straight up odd. Like citing a random conference paper from 30 years ago versus well known pieces, multiple times.

commfox.bsky.social•39 days ago

There needs to be a serious reckoning with this. Demands on reviewers are at an all time high and paper quality seems to be at an all time low. I am extremely burned out on dishonest authorship, whether that's AI or people who can't bother to read faking their lit review.

commfox.bsky.social•39 days ago

I feel like emailing editors these days and asking if they've read the paper and can assure me it is worth 6-10 hours of my time. Multiply that by the number of reviewers. Is this paper good enough to justify taking 20, 30, 40 hours away from other scholars? That's a real cost.

katypearce.bsky.social•38 days ago

At JCMC we have at least 2, usually 3, eyes on everything.

commfox.bsky.social•39 days ago

This is how reviewing needs to be reframed. Some of us are losing a 2-3 week vacation every year. I will happily make that to help good science improve, or to help at a lower tier journal with pedagogical aims. I can't save science, but I am done giving my time to grifters & journal spammers.

Posting Rules

Be respectful to others
No spam or self-promotion
Stay on topic
Follow Bluesky's terms of service

Comments

Posting Rules

Reply