Month: September 2025

We must set the rules for AI use in scientific writing and peer review

GenAI:N3
A group of scientists and academics in lab coats are seated around a conference table in a modern meeting room with a city skyline visible through a large window. Above them, a glowing holographic screen displays "GOVERNING AI IN SCIENTIFIC PUBLICATION," with two main columns: "Scientific Writing" and "Peer Review," each listing specific regulations and ethical considerations for AI use, such as authorship, plagiarism checks, and bias detection. Image (and typos) generated by Nano Banana.
As AI’s role in academic research rapidly expands, establishing clear guidelines for its use in scientific writing and peer review has become an urgent imperative. This image depicts a panel of experts discussing these crucial regulations, emphasizing the need to set ethical frameworks to maintain integrity, transparency, and fairness in the scientific publication process. Image (and typos) generated by Nano Banana.

Source

Times Higher Education

Summary

George Chalhoub argues that as AI becomes more entrenched in research and publication, the academic community urgently needs clear, enforceable guidelines for its use in scientific writing and peer review. He cites evidence of undeclared AI involvement in manuscripts and reviews, hidden prompts, and inflated submission volume. To maintain credibility, journals must require authors and reviewers to disclose AI use, forbid AI as a co-author, and ensure human oversight. Chalhoub frames AI as a tool—not a decision-maker—and insists that accountability, transparency, and common standards must guard against erosion of trust in the scientific record.

Key Points

  • Significant prevalence of AI content: e.g. 13.5 % of 2024 abstracts bore signs of LLM use, with some fields reaching 40 %.
  • Up to ~17 % of peer review sentences may already be generated by AI, per studies of review corpora.
  • Some authors embed hidden prompts (e.g. white-text instructions) to influence AI-powered reviewing tools.
  • Core requirements: disclosure of AI use (tools, versions, roles), human responsibility for verification, no listing of AI as author.
  • Journals should adopt policies involving audits, sanctions for misuse, and shared frameworks via organisations like COPE and STM.

Keywords

, , , ,

URL

https://www.timeshighereducation.com/opinion/we-must-set-rules-ai-use-scientific-writing-and-peer-review

Summary generated by ChatGPT 5

GenAI News

Universities give up using software to detect AI in students’ work

GenAI:N3
In a university meeting room, a holographic display shows a broken padlock icon, symbolizing the failure or abandonment of AI detection software. Professionals are seated around a conference table, some looking at laptops. Image (and typos) generated by Nano Banana.
Universities are re-evaluating their strategies for academic integrity as many are moving away from relying on software to detect AI-generated content in student assignments. This shift reflects growing complexities and challenges in accurately identifying AI’s role in students’ work. Image (and typos) generated by Nano Banana.

Source

RNZ

Summary

Several New Zealand universities, including Massey, Auckland, and Victoria, have abandoned AI-detection software in student assessments, citing unreliability and inconsistency. Massey University’s move followed a major online exam monitoring failure in 2024, after which academics reported that detection results were often misused to accuse students. Research shows detection tools are easy to fool, leading institutions to shift towards alternative strategies: secured in-person assessments, oral defences, and checking document version histories. Universities stress they are not giving up on integrity but adapting to a changing environment by embedding AI literacy and focusing on preventative measures rather than flawed detection.

Key Points

  • Massey, Auckland, and Victoria universities no longer use AI detection software due to poor reliability.
  • Detection tools were inconsistent, with some staff misusing results to accuse students.
  • Alternative checks include document history tracking, professional judgement, and oral exams.
  • Universities focus on secured assessments (e.g. labs, studios, exams) rather than online monitoring.
  • Shift aims to prioritise AI literacy, ethics, and learning-centred approaches over surveillance.

Keywords

, , , ,

URL

https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/574517/universities-give-up-using-software-to-detect-ai-in-students-work

Summary generated by ChatGPT 5

GenAI News

How AI is reshaping education – from teachers to students

GenAI:N3
A split image depicting the impact of AI on education. On the left, a female teacher stands in front of a holographic 'AI POWERED INSTRUCTION' diagram, addressing a group of students. On the right, students are engaged with 'AI LEARNING PARTNER' interfaces, one wearing a VR headset. A central glowing orb with 'EDUCATION TRANSFORMED: AI' connects both sides, symbolizing the pervasive change AI brings to both teaching and learning. Generated by Nano Banana.
From empowering educators with intelligent instruction tools to providing students with personalised AI learning partners, artificial intelligence is fundamentally reshaping every facet of education. This image illustrates the transformative journey, highlighting how AI is creating new dynamics in classrooms and preparing both teachers and learners for a future redefined by technology. Image (and typos) generated by Nano Banana.

Source

TribLIVE

Summary

In this article, educators in a Pennsylvania school district discuss how AI is being woven into teaching practice and student learning—not by replacing teachers, but amplifying their capacity. AI tools like Magic School help teachers personalise lesson plans, adjust reading levels, reduce repetitive tasks, and monitor student use. A “traffic light” system is used to label assignments by allowed level of AI. New teachers are required to learn AI tools; students begin learning about AI ethically from early grades. The district emphasises that AI should not replace human work but free teachers to focus more on interpersonal and high-order thinking.

Key Points

  • Magic School is used to adapt assignments by subject, grade, and reading level, giving teachers flexibility.
  • Teachers are being trained and supported in AI adoption via workshops, pilot programs, and guided experiments.
  • A colour-coded “traffic light” system distinguishes when AI is allowed (green), allowed for some parts (yellow), or disallowed (red).
  • Starting in early grades, students are taught what AI is and how to use it ethically; higher grades incorporate more active use.
  • The goal: reduce workload on teachers for repetitive tasks so they can devote more energy to student interaction and complex thinking.

Keywords

, , , ,

URL

https://triblive.com/local/regional/heres-how-ai-is-reshaping-education-from-teachers-to-students/

Summary generated by ChatGPT 5

GenAI News

AI and human learning

GenAI:N3
Four professionals (three female, one male) are seated around a modern round table in a library setting. From the center of the table, two intertwining beams of light, one blue (labeled 'AI ASSISTANCE') and one orange (labeled 'HUMAN COGNITION'), rise upwards, filled with icons representing data, brains, books, and scientific symbols. The beams symbolize the synergistic relationship between AI and human learning. Generated by Nano Banana.
Exploring the dynamic interplay between artificial intelligence and human cognition, this image visualises a future where AI acts as a powerful assistant, enhancing and amplifying our natural learning capabilities. It underscores a collaborative relationship, where technology and human intellect intertwine to unlock new depths of understanding and innovation. Image (and typos) generated by Nano Banana.

Source

Dawn

Summary

The article examines how Large Language Models and chatbots are reshaping learning in schools and universities. While AI boosts productivity in basic tasks (summarisation, drafting), it fails to deliver on more complex, multi-step reasoning. The author warns that overreliance on AI risks stunting skills like reading, writing, reasoning, and sustaining depth of thought. Learning is not just about output; it’s a process that tests and builds internal faculties. AI’s inherent hallucination problem adds further risk. The piece argues for institutional safeguards and restrictions on AI use in foundational learning stages.

Key Points

  • AI improves efficiency in simple tasks, but shows no clear gains in complex, multi-stage reasoning.
  • Learning as process is key: reading and writing actively shapes thinking, which AI can’t substitute.
  • Overuse of AI could lead to deskilling: students risk losing internal cognitive capacity.
  • The hallucination risk (AI generating false content) undermines trust in AI outputs.
  • Institutions need to assign boundaries to AI use, particularly where literacy and foundational skills are at stake.

Keywords

, , , ,

URL

https://www.dawn.com/news/1945405

Summary generated by ChatGPT 5

GenAI News

Generative AI might end up being worthless – and that could be a good thing

GenAI:N3
A large, glowing, glass orb of generative AI data is shattering and dissipating into a pile of worthless dust. The ground is dry and cracked, and behind the orb, a single, small, green sprout is beginning to grow, symbolizing a return to human creativity. The scene visually represents the idea that the potential 'worthlessness' of AI could be a good thing. Generated by Nano Banana.
While the value of generative AI is a subject of intense debate, some argue that its potential to become ‘worthless’ could be a positive outcome. This image captures the idea that if AI’s allure fades, it could clear the way for a resurgence of human-led creativity, critical thinking, and innovation, ultimately leading to a more meaningful and authentic creative landscape. Image (and typos) generated by Nano Banana.

Source

The Conversation

Summary

The article argues that the current hype around generative AI (GenAI) may oversell its value: it may eventually prove “worthless” in terms of sustainable returns, which wouldn’t necessarily be bad. Because GenAI is costly to operate and its productivity gains so far modest, many companies could fail to monetise it. Such a collapse might temper hype, reduce wasteful spending, and force society to focus on deeper uses of AI (ethics, reliability, human-centred value) rather than chasing illusions. The author sees a scenario where AI becomes a modest tool rather than the transformative juggernaut many expect.

Key Points

  • GenAI’s operational costs are high and monetisation is uncertain, so many ventures may fail.
  • Overhyping AI risks creating bubble dynamics—lots of investment chasing little real value.
  • A “worthless” AI future may force more careful, grounded development rather than blind expansion.
  • It could shift attention to AI’s limits, ethics, robustness, and human oversight.
  • The collapse of unrealistic expectations might be healthier than unchecked hype.

Keywords

, , , , ,

URL

https://www.theconversation.com/generative-ai-might-end-up-being-worthless-and-that-could-be-a-good-thing-266046

Summary generated by ChatGPT 5

GenAI News