Science Slop: Large language models and chatbots are growing in popularity for both recreational use and, in some cases, serious research projects. However, one of the internet's most popular research platforms is looking to curb misuse by users who rely on low-quality chatbot prompts without properly verifying the final output.
The arXiv (pronounced "archive") team recently announced a significant update to its official code of conduct. The popular open-access repository of research papers awaiting peer review will now seek to deter AI-generated "slop" by enforcing stricter accountability rules, including a one-year ban for violations. The team said that using LLMs and generative AI tools is generally acceptable, but only if the final output is carefully reviewed and corrected to remove hallucinated or inaccurate content.
Thomas G. Dietterich, a distinguished professor at Oregon State University and member of arXiv's moderation team, recently outlined the changes on social media. He explained that the updated code of conduct "states that by signing your name as an author of a paper, each author takes full responsibility for all its contents, irrespective of how the contents were generated."
Dietterich emphasized the implications for generative AI tools in particular. If authors use LLMs or chatbots to draft or enhance a paper, they must proofread the final version for inappropriate language, plagiarism, bias, and other unacceptable content. Ultimately, each author is responsible for any errors or hallucinations produced by AI tools.
– Thomas G. Dietterich (@tdietterich) May 14, 2026
After confirming the presence of clear evidence that a paper contains AI-generated content that was not properly removed prior to submission, arXiv's moderation team will impose a one-year ban from the platform. According to Dietterich, if a paper contains such AI-generated material, arXiv may question the reliability of the work as a whole.
In addition, a banned author will be required to publish through a reputable peer-reviewed venue before being allowed to return to arXiv. Dietterich provided examples of AI-generated artifacts that could trigger a ban, including LLM "meta-comments" such as "here is a summary," "would you like to make any changes?", and similar boilerplate text.
He also explained that the "one-strike" ban policy will go through a formal moderation process. Moderators must first flag and verify evidence of AI-generated content before any penalty is imposed. Authors will also have the opportunity to appeal decisions before a ban is finalized.
arXiv is a free open-access repository hosting more than 2.4 million papers across physics, mathematics, computer science, biology, statistics, engineering, and other fields. In a landscape increasingly shaped by AI-generated content, the platform remains a critical hub for early-stage research dissemination.
It remains to be seen whether the new code of conduct will be sufficient to deter misuse of generative AI and reduce low-quality submissions that could undermine the integrity of open-access research platforms.