Study Featuring AI-Generated Giant Rat Penis Retracted, Journal Apologizes
www.vice.com
A peer-reviewed study featured nonsensical AI images including a giant rat penis in the latest example of how generative AI has seeped into academia.

Study featuring AI-generated giant rat penis retracted entirely, journal apologizes::A peer-reviewed study featured nonsensical AI images including a giant rat penis in the latest example of how generative AI has seeped into academia.

  • @[email protected]English
    35•5 months ago

    A few things came together for me here.

    The paper had two reviewers, one in India and one based in the U.S.

    .

    “…a reviewer of the paper had raised concerns about the AI-generated images that were ignored.”

    .

    …the U.S.-based reviewer who said that they evaluated the study based solely on its scientific merits and that it was up to Frontiers whether or not to publish the AI-generated images…

    .

    "The authors failed to respond to these requests. We are investigating how our processes failed to act on the lack of author compliance… "

    They don’t outright say it in the article, but it looks like the reviewer based in India was the one who actually raised concerns about the garbage images. The authors were supposed to respond, but didn’t, and the journal published anyway.

    I will readily admit that this is just my own conclusion here, but – I wonder if there was an element of racism that went into ignoring the reviewer’s concerns?

    • @[email protected]English
      15•5 months ago

      Why do you bring up race? Is there anything that would imply that?

      People are lazy and incompetent as fuck, and it’s been an industry wide problem that publishing companies in general have lower and lower standards of quality.

      • @[email protected]English
        0•5 months ago

        I brought it up purely as speculation, as one possible explanation for why the process was not properly followed. I don’t have any experience with publishing companies, whether for science journals or otherwise.

      • @[email protected]English
        -5•5 months ago

        He didn’t bring up race, he brought up location. Like, you’re the one that brought up race? If it was one American reviewer and one Australian reviewer and this poster said “the Austrian caught it”, would you have made the same comment you just did?

        What if the “reviewer based in India” is white?

        Edit: I am a ijit, I actually agree with you, and my “what if person based in india is white” should be directed at the guy you’re replying to.

        • JojoEnglish
          12•5 months ago

          He literally said

          I wonder if there was an element of racism that went into ignoring the reviewer’s concerns?

          So…

    • @[email protected]English
      10•5 months ago

      Check out their controversies section on Wikipedia. This doesn’t seem out of character for this publication. It’s more likely incompetence than malice.