conv.

All stories
AIActive · 18h

University of Chicago professor's 257 AI papers removed from platform

An online repository took down papers by Nicholas Polson after academics questioned their quality and authenticity.

What to know

  • An online platform removed 257 papers attributed to University of Chicago professor Nicholas Polson after academics questioned their legitimacy and quality.
  • Polson had produced approximately 200 papers and 14 books in nine months using AI assistance, raising questions about the feasibility and authenticity of the output.
  • The incident has sparked a broader debate in the academic community about AI's role in scholarly publishing and whether high-volume AI-generated work serves the purpose of advancing knowledge.

The dispute Whether the rapid production of papers is technically possible or desirable remains contested, with critics questioning both the feasibility and the fundamental purpose of such output. · positions read across 3 posts and comments

most voices

AI-generated academic work undermines scholarly integrity and the pursuit of knowledge.

  • “Did you spend all those years studying and working to make AI button pressing your entire career? Keep in mind this is a tenured professor at one of the world's leading universities. So much for the noble pursuit of knowledge!”

    tiffanycli@mastodon.social · Mastodon ↗

Nicholas Polson University of Chicago professorOther academics Peer reviewers and scholarly community members

How it unfolded 4 developments, newest first · click a bar or a number to jump posts

Peak 2 pieces in one half hour at Yesterday, 5 AM; 8 pieces over 19 hours (1 article · 7 posts) Yesterday, 5:59 AM — 2 pieces · 1 article · 1 post — Mastodon 2Yesterday, 6:29 AM — quietYesterday, 6:59 AM — quietYesterday, 7:29 AM — quietYesterday, 7:59 AM — 1 piece · 1 post — Mastodon 1Yesterday, 8:29 AM — 1 piece · 1 post — Bluesky 1Yesterday, 8:59 AM — 1 piece · 1 post — Hacker News 1Yesterday, 9:29 AM — quietYesterday, 9:59 AM — quietYesterday, 10:29 AM — quietYesterday, 10:59 AM — quietYesterday, 11:29 AM — quietYesterday, 11:59 AM — quietYesterday, 12:29 PM — quietYesterday, 12:59 PM — quietYesterday, 1:29 PM — quietYesterday, 1:59 PM — 1 piece · 1 post — Mastodon 1Yesterday, 2:29 PM — quietYesterday, 2:59 PM — quietYesterday, 3:29 PM — quietYesterday, 3:59 PM — quietYesterday, 4:29 PM — quietYesterday, 4:59 PM — quietYesterday, 5:29 PM — 1 piece · 1 post — Mastodon 1Yesterday, 5:59 PM — quietYesterday, 6:29 PM — quietYesterday, 6:59 PM — quietYesterday, 7:29 PM — quietYesterday, 7:59 PM — quietYesterday, 8:29 PM — quietYesterday, 8:59 PM — quietYesterday, 9:29 PM — 1 piece · 1 post — Mastodon 1Yesterday, 9:59 PM — quietYesterday, 10:29 PM — quietYesterday, 10:59 PM — quietYesterday, 11:29 PM — quietYesterday, 11:59 PM — quietToday, 12:29 AM — quiet 1234
8 AM12 PM4 PM8 PMnow · 12:59 AM ET
  1. 4

    Academics question the purpose and ethics of high-volume AI publishing

    A tenured professor at a leading university challenges the fundamental purpose of producing hundreds of AI-generated papers and what this means for the pursuit of knowledge.

    “Because, yes, you can use ChatGPT to spit out 200 papers a year if you want. But to what end? What is the point?”
    — tiffanycli@mastodon.social
    • tiffanycli@mastodon.social

      This is so funny to me. Because, yes, you can use ChatGPT to spit out 200 papers a year if you want. But to what end? What is the point? Did you spend all those years studying and working to make AI button pressing your entire career? Keep in mind this is a tenured professor at one of the world’s leading universities. So much for the noble pursuit…

      tiffanycli@mastodon.socialMastodon7h ago34▲view on Mastodon ↗
    1 more of the top 2 · 2 posts in this stretch
    • smeedha@mastodon.bida.im

      😮‍💨 sigh https://www. washingtonpost.com/education/2 026/09/23/nine-months-200-academic-papers-one-professors-ai-assisted-output/

      smeedha@mastodon.bida.imMastodon3h agoview on Mastodon ↗
    all of them →
  2. 3

    Critics question the value of AI-generated academic work

    Academic voices on social media express skepticism about the legitimacy and value of such rapid, AI-assisted scholarly production.

    “Instead of reading these, I think I'll go reread Marx's theory of alienation.”
    — lawprofblawg@mstdn.social
    • lawprofblawg@mstdn.social

      Instead of reading these, I think I'll go reread Marx's theory of alienation. https://www. washingtonpost.com/education/2 026/09/23/nine-months-200-academic-papers-one-professors-ai-assisted-output/

      lawprofblawg@mstdn.socialMastodon10h agoview on Mastodon ↗
  3. 2

    Academic community amplifies story on social platforms

    The story spread across Bluesky and Mastodon, with academics and researchers sharing and discussing the report, including hashtags for scholarly communication, publishing, and AI.

  4. 1

    Washington Post reports Polson's AI-assisted papers removed from platform

    The Washington Post published an article detailing that an online platform removed 257 papers written or co-written by University of Chicago professor Nicholas Polson after other academics raised questions about the output.

    “An online platform removed 257 papers written or co-written by the University of Chicago's Nicholas Polson after other academics raised questions.”
    — Washington Post · source
    1. first by Mastodon, 18h ago

What people are saying 0 voices from 0 sites · best of 3 · verbatim