Recent searches
Search options
Colleague just got a clearly AI-written peer review. Citing non-existent papers and scolding her for the mistakes which aren't to be found in the manuscript.
I wonder what would be a good line of action? Shouldn't be citing a non-existent papers by a reviewer a reason for referee recusal and banning from #PeerReview at least at this publisher?
@tyx (shakes head... 
)
@tyx It also suggests the editor didn't check that comments were based on reality, which isn't good for reliability. She can probably withdraw the submission (if context allows it), point out the problem as explicitly as possible in a descriptive way and look for a different publisher. Outright banning a publisher might be challenging depending on the field and career / precarity.
@MartinVuilleme
>It also suggests the editor didn't check that comments were based on reality
Uh, I have an impression that happens most of the time. Editors tend to read the review for the first time when you have already answered to it.
> She can probably withdraw the submission
>[...] and look for a different publisher
Alas, the timing is quite tight. But temptation is huge.
> Outright banning a publisher might be challenging depending on the field and career
True, it's a go-to journal for the field. Alternatives are either too high-tier or make no sense in terms of IF.