New arXiv policy: 1-year ban for hallucinated references

Post by dumpsterdiver » Tue, May 19, 2026, 1:05 PM UTC

brazzy wrote: post #176

dumpsterdiver wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’ve disagreed with some of your other stances in this thread, but I want to acknowledge the validity of your take here. You’re right that a single hallucinated line is not evidence of reckless disregard - because that could have happened on a final follow-up pass after you had performed due diligence. It’s happened to me. I know how challenging it can be to keep bad patterns out of LLM generated output, because huma…

> You’re right that a single hallucinated line is not evidence of reckless disregard It absolutely is. > - because that could have happened on a final follow-up pass after you had performed due diligence. A "final follow-up pass" that lets the LLM make whatever changes it deems appropriate completely negates all the due diligence you did before, unless you very carefully review the diffs. And a new or substantially c…

Context matters a lot. I didn’t publish any papers, and didn’t even provide the context of the LLM mistakes I caught to later report on, so no, I was not guilty of reckless disregard. I found those mistakes on an acceptable timeline.

Post by _aavaa_ » Wed, May 20, 2026, 1:28 AM UTC

T-A wrote: post #220

btown wrote: post #4

> The penalty is a 1-year ban from arXiv followed by the requirement that subsequent arXiv submissions must first be accepted at a reputable peer-reviewed venue. This is incredibly good for science. arXiv is free, but it's a privilege not a right! I'm not seeing this clearly listed on https://info.arxiv.org/help/policies/index.html so it's possible this is planned but not live yet - or perhaps I'm not digging deeply…

>> The penalty is a 1-year ban from arXiv followed by the requirement that subsequent arXiv submissions must first be accepted at a reputable peer-reviewed venue. Catch-22 [1]: You will need to provide an arXiv article id. This is necessary for your paper to be processed correctly, the submitted version must be the same as the arXiv version. [1] https://jcap.sissa.it/jcap/help/helpLoader.jsp?pgType=author

That’s the journal’s doing, not arxiv’s.

Re: New arXiv policy: 1-year ban for hallucinated references

Re: New arXiv policy: 1-year ban for hallucinated references