arXiv’s Code of Conduct now holds authors fully responsible for all paper contents, including LLM-generated hallucinated references, with a 1-year submission ban as penalty.
Key Takeaways
Thomas Dietterich announced arXiv’s enforcement stance: signing a paper means full responsibility for contents regardless of how they were generated.
Penalty is a 1-year arXiv ban, after which subsequent submissions must first clear peer review at a reputable venue.
The policy applies to all authors listed on a submission, not just the primary submitter.
Whether the updated enforcement language is live on the arxiv.org policies page is unconfirmed as of announcement.
Hacker News Comment Review
Enforcement mechanics are the core open question: no public detail on how arXiv will detect hallucinated references at scale, whether via automated DOI verification or manual spot checks.
Commenters flagged ambiguity in the post-ban condition: “reputable peer-reviewed venue” is undefined, leaving room for venue-quality disputes.
The root tooling problem remains: BibTeX generation across arXiv, publisher sites, and conference pages is fragmented, and better citation tooling (e.g., Zotero, zbib.org) could reduce accidental errors versus willful negligence.
Notable Comments
@btown: Confirms penalty structure and notes the policy page may not yet reflect the new enforcement rules.
@ElenaDaibunny: Flags that enforcement at scale is unsolved – manual or automated DOI verification both have serious gaps.