This is one of the stupidest things I’ve ever read. The issue is with process - if you’re copy-pasting unchecked sources from an LLM, whatever you’re doing is not research. And the contagion spread of hallucinated sources is already well documented so no it’s not harmless.
- I've gotten a lot of comments like this, so forgive me if this isn't very kind, but I'm at my limit. If you're a serious academic, you've spent a lot of time looking at citations, and you know they often contain errors. You know that it's very common for professors just to copy citations they found in other papers and put them into their own papers because they need a lot of citations to look credible. Given that this is going on, it's kind of silly to think that we should have a kind of death penalty for having an LLM, hallucination mistake What you're doing is virtue signaling and pretending that citations are somehow sacred to what academics do, when in fact they're mostly just poorly put up window dressing. You're being dishonest. Perhaps with yourself, perhaps with me.
- I’ve never cited an article I haven’t read and I would not any circumstances consider citing cite an article I’ve never seen. What you describe as normal research practice is bullshit and yes if you accept that as normal the new LLM enabled bullshit is just a small step away.
- Tell me you're a fraud without telling me.
- Smith College should be informed of this. One thing about academics is that there are so many who are lightweight intellectually and a good number who are just plain stupid. They do not always come right out and prove it this way though. Tenure needs to be enforced more



