Study featuring AI-generated giant rat penis retracted entirely, journal apologizes::A peer-reviewed study featured nonsensical AI images including a giant rat penis in the latest example of how generative AI has seeped into academia.

  • agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    22
    ·
    5 months ago

    Of course some things will always slip through the cracks, but this is egregious. What does their peer-review process look like that this passed through it?

    • candybrie@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      5 months ago

      Right? Even when skimming papers, it’s usually: read title & abstract, look at figures, skim results & conclusion. If you don’t notice that the figure doesn’t have real words, how is anyone making sure the methodology makes sense? That the results show what the conclusion says they show?

    • brsrklf@jlai.lu
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      I am not disagreeing that this is ridiculous, I was just saying that this stupidity is not what should convince people not to take some random paper for an absolute truth, just because it was published.

      Even if you eliminate fraud, bullshit and even honest mistakes, that’s not how science works, ever.