{
  "slug": "ai-peer-review",
  "title": "Twenty one percent of the reviews were written by the thing being reviewed",
  "summary": "A fifth of reviews at a major AI conference appeared machine generated. Detection is the worst available answer. Peer review needs a signed act, not text policing.",
  "lede": "A fifth of the reviews submitted to a major machine learning conference appeared to be machine generated. The instinct is to buy a detector and start accusing people. That instinct is wrong, and in peer review specifically it is dangerous. The problem is not that reviewers use models. It is that no act in the system carries evidence that a person stood behind it.",
  "date": "2026-09-27",
  "reading_time": "19 min read",
  "category": "Research",
  "tags": [
    "AI peer review",
    "reviewer verification",
    "research integrity",
    "scholarly publishing",
    "AI detection",
    "signed review"
  ],
  "image": "https://cdn.twc.sh/images/igcache/AI%20Peer%20Review/1200_630/blog.jpg",
  "url": "/blog/ai-peer-review.html",
  "wordcount": 3514,
  "related": [
    "human-feedback-integrity",
    "detection-debt",
    "ai-pull-request-flood"
  ],
  "schema": "Article"
}