以下部分引用 AI 总结，现阶段 AI 仍然有幻觉。请以内容的原文为准。

数据新鲜度群聊 07-14 ✓卖方 07-14 ✓Wrap 断档15天 ✕News 07-15 ✓X 断档12天 ✕页面生成 07-15

ArXiv

13 atoms · 跨 3 天 · 首见 2026-05-15 · 最近 2026-05-18

三色: 🟦 fact 4 · 🟥 take 9 · stance ▲3/▼5/◆2

来源: X 13

时态: fresh:12 · stale:1

标签: 好观点:9 · 好信源:4

2026-05-18 · 不应主动筛选内容
But arXiv shouldn't be the one who curates, that's conferences and the community (like here on X).
tags: 好观点 · → daily
2026-05-18 · 高级作者可绕过审核
I am sure that Dan or Samy can just text someone at arXiv to get unbanned. A random PhD student can't
tags: 好观点 · → daily
2026-05-18 · 需基础反垃圾措施
some basic anti-spam is needed anyway.
tags: 好观点 · → daily
2026-05-18 · 平台应加强审核
No, it means they're finally starting to police it
tags: 好观点 · → daily
2026-05-18 · 不应进行任何审核
this is my take, yes. it is a pre-print service, not a conference
tags: 好观点 · → daily
2026-05-18 · 应惩罚不良行为
There needs to be punishment for bad behavior, otherwise there are no incentives to change.
tags: 好观点 · → daily

2026-05-18 · 对博士生惩罚过重
And they'll get the ban hammer, no appeals possible.
tags: 好观点 · → daily

展开 1 条老旧 / 已过期

2026-05-17 [老旧] · proposal: AI review before submission
any arxiv submission should receive an AI review and the authors should decide if they still post their paper given the review or first revise and then submit with their answer to the review
tags: 好观点 · → daily

2026-05-18 · 开始拒绝论文
Last year, ArXiv started to reject papers which they didn't deem worthy, be it position papers, architecture proposals or lit reviews (like the QT).
tags: 好信源 · → daily
value: date=last year
2026-05-18 · 审核有事实错误
And there are genuine human errors, eg the Hendrycks/Bengio et al. paper last year with wrong citations.
tags: 好信源 · → daily
2026-05-18 · 是主题性服务器
arxiv is a topical server, it is for scientific papers in specific areas, right? they always had a moderation and constraints (should be 'scholarly', 'topical' and have value).
tags: 好信源 · → daily
2026-05-15 · AI生成论文封禁政策
ArXiv, the repository of preprint academic research, says it will ban authors for a year if their papers have "incontrovertible evidence" of AI-generated work
tags: 好信源 · → daily
value: qty=1年 · direction=ban
2026-05-18 · 上诉机制无效
Appeals simply don't work, so the authors then have to seek alternatives, resulting in a more fragmented landscape…
tags: 好观点 · → daily