TL;DR
ArXiv will impose a one-year ban on authors caught submitting clearly AI-generated research papers with untrustworthy content. The move aims to address rising issues of AI-generated misinformation and fabricated citations in academic publishing.
ArXiv, the open-access preprint repository, will ban authors for one year if they submit papers containing incontrovertible evidence of AI-generated content deemed inappropriate or unreliable, according to a statement from Thomas Dietterich, chair of the computer science section.
In a statement posted on X (formerly Twitter), Dietterich clarified that the policy targets submissions with clear signs of AI-generated slop, such as hallucinated references, misleading comments from language models, or fabricated data. The penalty involves a one-year ban from submitting to arXiv, followed by a requirement that future papers be accepted at reputable peer-reviewed venues.
He emphasized that the policy is a ‘one-strike’ rule, meaning authors caught once with incontrovertible evidence will face the ban, but decisions are subject to an appeal process. The process involves moderation documentation and confirmation by the section chair before enforcement.
This move follows arXiv’s recent efforts to curb AI-related issues, including a November 2025 policy change that stopped accepting computer science review articles due to an influx of AI-generated ‘slop’ and a January 2026 requirement for first-time submitters to have endorsements from established authors, amid rising fraudulent submissions.
Why It Matters
This development marks a significant step in academic publishing’s response to the growing threat of AI-generated misinformation and fabricated citations. It aims to preserve the integrity of preprint research, which is increasingly affected by AI tools that generate misleading or false content, thereby straining peer review processes and undermining trust in scientific literature.
The policy underscores the urgency of addressing AI misuse in research and may influence other repositories and journals to adopt similar measures, shaping the future landscape of open-access scientific communication.
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
Background
In 2025, arXiv faced a surge in submissions contaminated with AI-generated ‘slop,’ prompting the platform to restrict certain categories and implement endorsement requirements. A 2026 study from Columbia University revealed that fabricated references have become more prevalent, with one in 277 biomedical papers containing false citations in early 2026, compared to one in 2,828 in 2023. These issues highlight the increasing difficulty in maintaining research quality amid widespread AI tool adoption.
ArXiv’s move to ban authors for a year reflects ongoing efforts to combat AI-related misconduct, especially as the platform prepares to become an independent nonprofit in July 2024, seeking broader funding to address these emerging challenges.
“If a submission contains incontrovertible evidence that the authors did not check the results of LLM generation, this means we can’t trust anything in the paper.”
— Thomas Dietterich
“This change will help arXiv raise more money from a wider range of donors, which is needed to deal with the emergence of ‘AI slop.'”
— Greg Morrisett
plagiarism and AI-generated text checker
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
What Remains Unclear
It is still unclear how strictly the policy will be enforced across different categories or how many authors might be affected initially. The specifics of what constitutes ‘incontrovertible evidence’ and how disputes will be resolved remain to be clarified as the policy is implemented.
academic integrity verification tools
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
What’s Next
ArXiv will begin applying the new ban policy immediately, with moderation and appeals processes in place. Monitoring of submissions will likely increase, and other academic platforms may consider adopting similar measures in response to rising AI-related misconduct.
research paper authenticity verification
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
Key Questions
What exactly counts as incontrovertible evidence of AI-generated ‘slop’?
Examples include hallucinated references, suspicious language model comments, or fabricated data and citations that cannot be reasonably disputed.
Can authors appeal a ban if they believe it was unjustified?
Yes, the policy allows for appeals, with decisions reviewed through an internal process involving documentation and confirmation by the section chair.
Will this policy affect all categories of submissions on arXiv?
It is currently focused on computer science submissions, but arXiv may expand its scope as AI-related issues continue to grow across disciplines.
How will arXiv verify if a paper contains AI-generated ‘slop’?
Verification will involve moderation review, looking for signs such as hallucinated references, suspicious comments, or fabricated data, with evidence documented before enforcement.
