|
| ▲ | GodelNumbering a day ago | parent | next [-] |
| That was the first thing I Ctrl+F'd in the paper, no results haha Broadly, I keep thinking about this over last year or two: while LLMs have nearly eliminated the bar for slop and coding slop, the reviewers are still expected to perform their job diligently. The asymmetry here is extremely taxing for reviewers of all AI generated content. And this is one thing that AI can't help with (as with any statistical process that lacks world understanding and grasp of logical inference). That's why I fully support Arxiv's tough stance on the AI use responsibility. |
|
| ▲ | jihadjihad a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| You're asking the right questions. |
|
| ▲ | malfist a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| I thought it was a belt and suspenders conclusion |
| |
| ▲ | tonyarkles a day ago | parent | next [-] | | This is one of the things that upsets me the most about LLM writing. “Load bearing” and “belt and suspenders” are two tropes I’ve used for a long, long time and now I have to be intentional about not using them lest I be accused of offloading my writing. | |
| ▲ | _joel a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Belt and braces please Claude, I'm British. | |
| ▲ | edot a day ago | parent | prev [-] | | Honestly? It’s the shape that makes it clearly AI. That’s the quiet admission at the heart of the problem. |
|
|
| ▲ | usui a day ago | parent | prev [-] |
| You're absolutely right to push back on that. Bottom line⸻it's not load-bearing, it's structural. And honestly⸻that's not nothing. No loads. No bears. Just structure. |
