Scientists aghast at AI rat with genitals in peer-reviewed article

Re:Scientists aghast at AI rat with genitals in peer-reviewe... by theogravity on Thursday February 15, 2024 @07:14PM (#39391226)

Will the people that did the peer reviews be sanctioned in any way? Seems so blatant that it doesn't look like it was actually reviewed at all.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Scientists aghast at AI rat with genitals in peer-reviewe... by jperoutek on Thursday February 15, 2024 @07:23PM (#39391308)

To me, this is the real question. One of the purposes of the peer-review is to validate and verify results, which was clearly not done to a great extent here. Perhaps the reviewers were also using some type of AI?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Scientists aghast at AI rat with genitals in peer-reviewe... by favorited on Thursday February 15, 2024 @07:55PM (#39391636)

The reviewers are cited as part of the publication:

Binsila B. Krishnan, National Institute of Animal Nutrition and Physiology (ICAR), India

Jingbo Dai, Northwestern Medicine, United States

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Scientists aghast at AI rat with genitals in peer-reviewe... by hermitcrab on Thursday February 15, 2024 @08:25PM (#39391868)

From a quick Google, they appear to be real people.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Scientists aghast at AI rat with genitals in peer-reviewe... by hermitcrab on Thursday February 15, 2024 @07:34PM (#39391421)

Perhaps the reviewer was an AI. Which gives a new spin to 'peer review'.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Scientists aghast at AI rat with genitals in peer-reviewe... by dexzod on Thursday February 15, 2024 @08:19PM (#39391826)

makes sense, because the peer of AI can only be AI

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Scientists aghast at AI rat with genitals in peer-reviewe... by gs17 on Friday February 16, 2024 @01:08AM (#39393754)

Frontiers has an explicit rule against that, although I doubt any reviewer would admit to it.

[ Parent | on HN ]