arXiv AI Slop Leads to Yearlong Submission Ban

The infiltration of AI-generated nonsense into academic publishing has reached a tipping point. From fake citations and unedited chatbot responses to bizarre, nonsensical diagrams that somehow fooled editors and peer reviewers, the scholarly record has become littered with what many are calling “AI slop.” Until now, the consequences for those responsible have been unclear, but that is changing.

A major preprint server is now taking a hard line. arXiv, the widely used repository for physics, astronomy, and related fields, will impose a one-year submission ban on any author caught uploading inappropriate AI-generated content. Additionally, those banned individuals will face a permanent requirement that all future submissions undergo formal peer review before arXiv will host them. The policy was announced via social media by a key figure within the organization.

Thomas Dietterich, an emeritus professor at Oregon State University and a member of both arXiv’s editorial advisory council and its moderation team, shared the details. His role gives him direct insight into the organization’s enforcement strategy. Ars Technica has reached out to arXiv leadership for official confirmation but has not yet received a response.

This move signals a broader crackdown across scientific disciplines, targeting AI-generated problems before they ever reach journals or formal peer review. The message is clear: the era of unchecked algorithmic slop in preprint repositories is coming to an end.