ylai to Science@mander.xyzEnglish · 9 months agoScience journal retracts peer-reviewed article containing AI generated ‘nonsensical’ imagesventurebeat.comexternal-linkmessage-square5fedilinkarrow-up173arrow-down13cross-posted to: generative_ai@mander.xyzartificial_intel
arrow-up170arrow-down1external-linkScience journal retracts peer-reviewed article containing AI generated ‘nonsensical’ imagesventurebeat.comylai to Science@mander.xyzEnglish · 9 months agomessage-square5fedilinkcross-posted to: generative_ai@mander.xyzartificial_intel
minus-squareKissaki@feddit.delinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up13·edit-29 months agoHow do they do peer-reviews? Evidently it was not enough for what you expect from a vetted journal and what peer-reviews implies. Any consequences or planned changes?
minus-squareCluckN@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up3·9 months agoFrom what I remember reading the company that released this pumps out papers full of gibberish and AI images. Authors can pay money to put their name on these papers to boost their standings in academia.
How do they do peer-reviews? Evidently it was not enough for what you expect from a vetted journal and what peer-reviews implies.
Any consequences or planned changes?
From what I remember reading the company that released this pumps out papers full of gibberish and AI images. Authors can pay money to put their name on these papers to boost their standings in academia.