At least 50 hallucinated citations found in ICLR 2026 submissions

Re:At least 50 hallucinated citations found in ICLR 2026 sub... by noitpmeder on Sunday December 07, 2025 @12:15PM (#46183266)

I'd go one further and say all published papers should come with a clear list of "claimed truths", and one is only able to cite said paper if they are linking in to an explicit truth.

Then you can build a true hierarchy of citation dependencies, checked 'statically', and have better indications of impact if a fundamental truth is disproven, ...

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:At least 50 hallucinated citations found in ICLR 2026 sub... by vkou on Sunday December 07, 2025 @03:02PM (#46184618)

Have you authored a lot of non-CS papers?

Could you provide a proof of concept paper for that sort of thing? Not a toy example, an actual example, derived from messy real-world data, in a non-trivial[1] field?

---

[1] Any field is non-trivial when you get deep enough into it.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:At least 50 hallucinated citations found in ICLR 2026 sub... by noitpmeder on Friday December 12, 2025 @08:38PM (#46251149)

I'd say my expectation is papers should be minimal in their effect, and compounding. If your project proves new facts, either they should be clearly enumerable (with as much specificity as possible), or your project/presentation/paper should be broken up to the point your findings ARE enumerable.

[ Parent | on HN ]