Sign in

krishnakumarv.bsky.social

@krishnakumarv.bsky.social
21 followers 7 following 243 posts
PostsRepliesMedia
krishnakumarv.bsky.social @krishnakumarv.bsky.social · 23h
Google DeepMind pushing agents for peer review is interesting. It wants agents to document their uncertainty, which science needs. Mainstream chatbots smooth over the gray areas. deepmind.google/public-polic...
deepmind.google
How AI Agents are transforming scientific discovery
AI agents are starting to reshape science, from proposing novel hypotheses to writing code. Learn what comes next for scientists and policymakers.
000 0
krishnakumarv.bsky.social @krishnakumarv.bsky.social · 15/10/2026
A wonderful essay on AI widening the gap between representations of research and the research behind them. The coolest thing I learned is the dichotomy between thinking and thought. scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2026/10/05/t...
scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org
The Representation Is Not the Scholarship - The Scholarly Kitchen
The problem with AI may not be that machines are growing more intelligent. It may be that we are becoming increasingly skilled at amplifying a highly capable, but limited form of cognition.
000 0
krishnakumarv.bsky.social @krishnakumarv.bsky.social · 14/10/2026
Vita, a new Chinese-owned open-access journal, waives APCs. It is unclear how a journal with no APC sustains itself. The Chinese government push is likely to slowly drive a migration of output into Chinese-origin journals. www.nature.com/articles/d41...
nature.com
Chinese-owned science journal created to rival the best
Newly launched Vita is part of a broader government plan to give China a bigger say in what counts as high-quality science.
000 0
krishnakumarv.bsky.social @krishnakumarv.bsky.social · 13/10/2026
Ambivalent about arXiv capping every submitter at two submissions a month. Prachee Avasthi objects that genuine submissions will be barred, and suggests automated checks so volunteer screeners review only the truly high-risk ones. blog.arxiv.org/2026/10/01/u...
blog.arxiv.org
Fair Moderation, Equitable Access, and AI: arXiv’s Updated Rate Limit Policy
arXiv, and the scientific community at large, are facing a watershed moment. Scholarly publishing is currently changing at a rapid pace, and we are seeing a…
000 0
krishnakumarv.bsky.social @krishnakumarv.bsky.social · 12/10/2026
Patent lawyers with an AI drafting assistant did better, but once it was gone only the seniors kept the gain. If we always work with AI assistance, I worry we never develop the skills. marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevo...
marginalrevolution.com
Does AI assistance enhance or erode expertise? - Marginal REVOLUTION
From a new NBER working paper: Whether AI assistance builds or erodes professional expertise is unsettled. In a pre-registered three-month randomized controlled trial, we gave 133 practicing patent…
000 0
krishnakumarv.bsky.social @krishnakumarv.bsky.social · 09/10/2026
Paper-mill content may be retracted, but it still reaches policy documents that may lack the same rigor. We need integrity screening at the policymaker stage too. retractionwatch.com/2026/09/17/p...
retractionwatch.com
Paper mill studies get cited by clinical guidelines, policy docs and more, analysis finds
Bank Phrom/Unsplash Studies produced by a suspected paper mill are frequently cited in patents, clinical guidelines and policy documents, according to a new analysis.  The work, posted on arXi…
010 0
krishnakumarv.bsky.social @krishnakumarv.bsky.social · 08/10/2026
A Scholarly Kitchen post on peer review being split into exploration and validation tracks. I see the point, but poor research, much of it pseudoscience, would pass as exploration and corrupt science. scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2026/09/17/r...
scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org
Rethinking Scholarly Evaluation: Matching Rigor to Purpose - The Scholarly Kitchen
What if the systems designed to protect scientific rigor are also making it harder for new ideas to emerge? Do different scholarly contributions deserve unique forms of evaluation?
000 0
krishnakumarv.bsky.social @krishnakumarv.bsky.social · 07/10/2026
Thomas and Erin Ptacek's rules for writing with an LLM: write the draft yourself, make the substantive edits by hand, only then run it past the model for copyediting. Sounds like a solid base to build on! sockpuppet.org/blog/2026/09...
sockpuppet.org
How To Write With An LLM
Two rules keep an LLM from pasteurizing your writing: never take a word it suggests, and never let it encourage you. Then hand it all the tedious work.
000 0
krishnakumarv.bsky.social @krishnakumarv.bsky.social · 06/10/2026
Nobody in the publishing chain has an incentive to ask why submission volume exists. The author sells AI solutions and says so. I don't see the problem with using AI on the problems it is accelerating. scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2026/09/11/g...
scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org
Guest Post — A Groupthink We Don't Talk Much About - The Scholarly Kitchen
Today's guest post challenges our community to face tendencies toward groupthink and address the incentive structures that resist adaptation and innovation.
000 0
krishnakumarv.bsky.social @krishnakumarv.bsky.social · 05/10/2026
Twenty of 35 predatory journals accepted a machine-written manuscript. The combination of predatory publishers and paper mills is deadly, and I strongly feel automated screening is the only way to get a handle on the problem. link.springer.com/article/10.1...
link.springer.com
The barrier is purely financial: analysis of the acceptance rate and peer review practice of predatory journals using AI generated papers - Research Integrity and Peer Review
Introduction Unsolicited emails from predatory journals offer a quick opportunity to produce a first author publication for a fee. With increasing emphasis on first author publications for…
000 0
krishnakumarv.bsky.social @krishnakumarv.bsky.social · 24/09/2026
Emotionally engaging formats beat factual ones, and personal responsibility appeals do nothing or backfire. Something I think about a lot, both for professional communications and my own conversations with skeptics. www.nature.com/articles/d41...
nature.com
El Niño goes viral — and scientists learn what makes people care about the climate
Evoking emotions is more likely to prompt people to engage with climate efforts than are data alone.
000 0
krishnakumarv.bsky.social @krishnakumarv.bsky.social · 23/09/2026
What does global mean in academia? To me it means global northwest. It should not, but it does. Why not local rankings instead, calibrated across geographies? www.researchprofessionalnews.com/rr-news-afri...
researchprofessionalnews.com
https://www.researchprofessionalnews.com/rr-news-africa-pan-african-2026-9-do-african-universities-need-their-own-locally-relevant-ranking/
010 0
krishnakumarv.bsky.social @krishnakumarv.bsky.social · 22/09/2026
Tenure-track faculty fell to 31.8% from 53.1% since 1987, and peer review runs on that pool. I'm for paid review, but AI-assisted tools feel more feasible. scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2026/09/14/a...
scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org
Ask the Chefs: Peer Review Capacity — Uncomfortable Truths and Overlooked Conversations - The Scholarly Kitchen
For Peer Review Week 2026, we asked the Chefs two questions: What is one uncomfortable truth about peer review that the scholarly publishing community doesn’t talk about enough? And, beyond…
000 0
krishnakumarv.bsky.social @krishnakumarv.bsky.social · 22/09/2026
Springer Nature now grades AI use by how much it affects interpretation, evaluation or decision-making. Subjective, but the better way to go, and OUP's survey shows plenty of disclosure gaps. group.springernature.com/gp/group/med...
group.springernature.com
Springer Nature launches updated AI policies and guidance to support responsible AI use | Springer Nature Group | Springer Nature
New framework provides practical, future-focused guidance for authors, reviewers and editors in an evolving AI landscape London | Berlin | New York |
000 0
krishnakumarv.bsky.social @krishnakumarv.bsky.social · 21/09/2026
An AI review that reads everything submitted at once, done right, is a good thing, isn't it? I also back the two-layer paper, a human narrative over a machine-readable evidence base. www.linkedin.com/pulse/has-sc...
linkedin.com
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/has-scientific-paper-become-too-big-human-peer-review-dino-di-carlo-2swuc/
000 0
krishnakumarv.bsky.social @krishnakumarv.bsky.social · 18/09/2026
Generation has become cheap and verification has not, so this piece splits the responsibility three ways. Publishers, institutions and AI providers. I love this split. www.researchinformation.info/analysis-opi...
researchinformation.info
Scientific literacy must keep pace with artificial intelligence - Research Information
AI is making science easier to access but harder to trust. Scientific literacy must catch up, writes Giulia Stefenelli
000 0
krishnakumarv.bsky.social @krishnakumarv.bsky.social · 17/09/2026
AI and psychology, a fascinating mix. For introverts like me, AI is a bridge from private thought to outward expression. Extraverts get feedback, so they can use it for introspection. theconversation.com/whether-your...
theconversation.com
Whether you’re an introvert or extravert may decide how you should use AI
We should adapt AI to how extraverts and introverts think.
000 0
krishnakumarv.bsky.social @krishnakumarv.bsky.social · 16/09/2026
Just about everywhere but the US is incentivizing researchers to... well... do research. India joins the party! Its Prime Minister Research Chair funds 120 returning researchers of Indian origin at up to 50 million rupees each over five years. www.nature.com/articles/d41...
nature.com
India has an ambitious plan to lure scientists back — will it work?
Initiatives to attract Indian researchers who are working abroad do not offer long-term income security, some scientists say.
000 0
krishnakumarv.bsky.social @krishnakumarv.bsky.social · 15/09/2026
Just over half of 1,645 researchers used AI for review tasks last year, and most journals ban it. I'm still going out on a limb and saying AI assistance will only enhance human review. www.science.org/content/arti...
science.org
Can AI help solve the peer-review crisis? Here are its promises and pitfalls
Amid a shortage of human reviewers, tests indicate AI can assist—but is not a savior
000 0
krishnakumarv.bsky.social @krishnakumarv.bsky.social · 14/09/2026
OpenAI hit its automated research intern goal. Wielded well, it could only benefit research. Its Astra model loops on queries, not readable steps, and I don't want to lose track of why AI does what it does. techcrunch.com/2026/09/02/o...
techcrunch.com
OpenAI’s new reasoning technique alarms AI safety experts | TechCrunch
OpenAI’s new Astra model will use “recurrent depth,” a technique that allows the model to operate outside of the sequential thinking that characterizes most reasoning models.
000 0
krishnakumarv.bsky.social @krishnakumarv.bsky.social · 13/09/2026
An 89,000-word novel written entirely by AI agents, five hours and $209.55 in tokens. This is the type of stuff you may find on Kindle Unlimited, something I posted about recently. antipodes.substack.com/p/superslop-...
antipodes.substack.com
Superslop, and How It Will Kill Your Book Deal
This is the opening of a novel that led to a four-way bidding war and a $3.5 million, two-book deal.
000 0
krishnakumarv.bsky.social @krishnakumarv.bsky.social · 12/09/2026
A preprint found AI writing in 14,419 self-published titles on Amazon, none disclosing it. The rebuttal says you cannot flood an already saturated market. I'm happy to see the counter point, but a saturated market with poor quality can still get worse. arxiv.org/abs/2607.20349
arxiv.org
Generative AI floods and dilutes the market for books
Generative AI can produce book-length works of fiction at near-zero cost. These books are often dismissed as low-quality ``slop'' that buyers will ignore, and are assumed to carry little commercial…
000 0
krishnakumarv.bsky.social @krishnakumarv.bsky.social · 11/09/2026
The best thing I got out of this interview is on textbooks. Publishers cannot compete with ChatGPT on breadth and should not try. A well-made textbook defines the field. www.ludenso.com/blog/thought...
ludenso.com
Thought Leaders in Publishing: Henriette Thiesen on AI and the future of the textbook
An interview with Henriette Thiesen, Publishing Director at Gyldendal and a Ludenso partner, part of Ludenso's series with leaders shaping educational publishing. The conversation explores what's at…
000 0
krishnakumarv.bsky.social @krishnakumarv.bsky.social · 10/09/2026
Clay published its internal AI writing policy. Stand behind every sentence. Writing is thinking. Longer is not better. I really like it. www.linkedin.com/posts/vaanan...
linkedin.com
https://www.linkedin.com/posts/vaanand_we-just-instituted-an-official-ai-writing-share-7492584308881330176-rcmv/
000 0
krishnakumarv.bsky.social @krishnakumarv.bsky.social · 09/09/2026
Undoubtedly, this study highlights/demonstrates that we are not being humble and hedgy anymore. Maybe this is a sign that AI is writing for us? Could it be? It might very well be, perhaps. PS: I'm definitely NOT losing my maybes. mahmudomar.com/essays/are-w...
mahmudomar.com
Are we losing our maybes?
A personal note on hedging, boosters, and a change in the language of scientific writing.
000 0
krishnakumarv.bsky.social @krishnakumarv.bsky.social · 08/09/2026
If you work with Claude Code or Codex, you will have been scalded enough to know that agentic systems fail on stale data, not weak reasoning. Context engineering is the differentiator now. thenextweb.com/news/whats-n...
thenextweb.com
What's next for AI and how to get there
Frontier models have converged. Stanford data shows top systems now score within 5% of each other. Oxylabs SVP Gediminas Rickevičius argues the competitive edge has shifted from model selection to…
200 0
krishnakumarv.bsky.social @krishnakumarv.bsky.social · 07/09/2026
The Scholarly Kitchen now enforces disclosure of AI-assisted writing and treats writing as thinking. I do see the point, but I have also enjoyed using AI to improve my writing while keeping my voice. scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2026/08/27/a...
scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org
AI Use in The Scholarly Kitchen - The Scholarly Kitchen
Some thoughts on the reader response the Scholarly Kitchen has seen regarding AI use by authors, a recent Nature News article on the efficacy of AI detection tools, and why it's important to keep…
000 0
krishnakumarv.bsky.social @krishnakumarv.bsky.social · 04/09/2026
64% of people now feel more confident challenging professional advice after checking it with AI. I am AI-forward and I see the point. But this survey shows the bad side clearly. www.techradar.com/pro/ai-is-ma...
techradar.com
AI is making people less confident in professionals such as doctors and teachers
AI is empowering people to ask questions - but the wrong kind
000 0
krishnakumarv.bsky.social @krishnakumarv.bsky.social · 03/09/2026
A DOI tells you which article. It does not tell you which version an AI actually read. The metadata around the identifier is where the work is. scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2026/08/19/g...
scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org
Guest Post — AI Can Find the Article. Can It Tell Which Version It Used? - The Scholarly Kitchen
In this AI era, establishing trust and validating article versions with persistent identifiers (PIDs) is more important than ever.
010 0
krishnakumarv.bsky.social @krishnakumarv.bsky.social · 02/09/2026
One paper mill in a dataset of seven supplies thirteen of the fourteen product categories on sale. Textbooks, articles, patents, design registrations, a national award. It operates out of India. Worrying. arxiv.org/abs/2604.24576
arxiv.org
BuyTheBy: A dataset of 18,710 text-based paper mill advertisements with 51,812 timestamped prices
The study of paper mills and similar businesses operating in the market for academic and education fraud services is frustrated by the lack of market price data on their various offerings. Here, we…
000 0
krishnakumarv.bsky.social @krishnakumarv.bsky.social · 01/09/2026
Owner slots on Australian design registrations, $95 a head. A real government record that reads as a patent on a CV. Worrying. www.theguardian.com/science/2026...
theguardian.com
Science or fiction? Shadowy ‘paper mills’ let you pay to be a published author – of fraudulent research
Paper mill activity has exploded in recent years, polluting the scientific ecosystem with falsified data and compromising medical research
000 0
krishnakumarv.bsky.social @krishnakumarv.bsky.social · 31/08/2026
120+ retractions over manipulated peer review in guest-edited issues. The guidance for guest editor collections exists. Put it into practice and automate. retractionwatch.com/2026/08/12/b...
retractionwatch.com
Biology journal pulls 100+ articles and counting from special issues for peer review manipulation
Elsevier’s International Journal of Biological Macromolecules has issued more than 100 retractions and counting for manipulated peer review in guest-edited special issues. The publisher has said on…
000 0
krishnakumarv.bsky.social @krishnakumarv.bsky.social · 28/08/2026
You can forge a painting but not its paper trail. Generator against detector is a never-ending game. Base the judgment on the coauthors, the funding and the affiliations, not just the prose. www.jmir.org/2026/1/e109033
jmir.org
https://www.jmir.org/2026/1/e109033
000 0
krishnakumarv.bsky.social @krishnakumarv.bsky.social · 27/08/2026
About 90% of biomedical papers from December 2025 show signs of AI-assisted writing, against a last published estimate of 13.5%. Some of that is a better estimator. The evidence still points one way. AI assistance is standard. www.nature.com/articles/d41...
nature.com
Staggering 90% of biomedical papers now show signs of AI help
The figure, which is much higher than previous estimates of large-language-model use, is for papers published in December and archived in PubMed.
000 0
krishnakumarv.bsky.social @krishnakumarv.bsky.social · 26/08/2026
A review scores journal AI policies on a five step readiness ladder. Most sit at the declarative level, disclosure rules and nothing behind them. I doubt we will ever reach the top two. sciencepolicyreview.org/wp-content/u...
sciencepolicyreview.org
https://sciencepolicyreview.org/wp-content/uploads/securepdfs/2026/07/v7_01_ai_education.pdf
000 0
krishnakumarv.bsky.social @krishnakumarv.bsky.social · 25/08/2026
The BMJ now limits AI to spelling, grammar and translation in letters and opinion articles, and none at all for columnists. A bit harsh. Writing should stay a human responsibility, but AI can tighten what a human wrote. www.bmj.com/content/394/...
bmj.com
https://www.bmj.com/content/394/bmj-2026-100498
000 0
krishnakumarv.bsky.social @krishnakumarv.bsky.social · 21/08/2026
OpenAlex merged 27,728 duplicate journal records in two weeks, with a second model trying to prove each pair different. Curation at this scale is a perfect task to delegate to agents with human supervision. Wonderful stuff. blog.openalex.org/a-major-clea...
blog.openalex.org
A major cleanup of journal records in OpenAlex
*This post was written with Claude. Every number and example was verified by a human against the live data. Unlike most scholarly databases, OpenAlex doesn’t start from journals. Other databases pick…
000 0
krishnakumarv.bsky.social @krishnakumarv.bsky.social · 20/08/2026
Crossref's first position paper says a PID decision is really an infrastructure decision. I wholeheartedly agree that the metadata and the infrastructure matter as much as the identifiers themselves. www.crossref.org/blog/why-pid...
crossref.org
Why PID strategies need more than PIDs: our first position paper - Crossref
PID strategies are being written around the world right now, and the decisions being made will shape the scholarly record for decades. After 25 years running open scholarly infrastructure—now on…
000 0
krishnakumarv.bsky.social @krishnakumarv.bsky.social · 19/08/2026
Only 11% of researchers get institutional funding for their main AI tool. Policy is tardy. More institutionalization means more regulation, which I would welcome. group.springernature.com/gp/group/med...
group.springernature.com
Early-career researchers lead shift towards AI-first discovery in research workflows | Springer Nature Group | Springer Nature
London | Berlin | New York, 20 July 2026 Global data released in The State of AI Use Among Researchers, a new white paper from Springer Nature1,
000 0
krishnakumarv.bsky.social @krishnakumarv.bsky.social · 18/08/2026
Researchers are doing more verification and less implementation. That is the common trend in OpenAI's field report on eight science projects run with coding agents. Happy to see Claude Code named in it. openai.com/index/scient...
openai.com
Scientific computing in the age of agentic AI
A new field report shows how scientists use AI coding agents to modernize scientific computing, accelerating software development and discovery in genomics and beyond.
020 0
krishnakumarv.bsky.social @krishnakumarv.bsky.social · 17/08/2026
An AI model kept disagreeing with a 75-year-old boiling point database. Turns out the database was wrong, not the model. To err is human, we all know. That's why AI assisting humans is the far more powerful workflow for judging research. www.nature.com/articles/d41...
nature.com
AI agents are checking the scientific literature — and spotting decades-old errors
The technology is proving adept at finding faults in decades-old papers and reference databases.
010 0
krishnakumarv.bsky.social @krishnakumarv.bsky.social · 14/08/2026
We all use AI to save time, but we don't really "get" extra time. We put it to use for more of the same, with arguably mediocre quality. That is what this modelling study predicts LLMs will make scientists do. www.nature.com/articles/d41...
nature.com
Scientists using LLMs will ‘do more, less well’, modelling study predicts
Research suggests that the combination of incentives to publish and the use of large language models will lead to more papers, but they will be less refined.
010 0
krishnakumarv.bsky.social @krishnakumarv.bsky.social · 13/08/2026
AI is publishing's third shot at owning its own infrastructure, after aggregators took the reader relationship and Google took discovery. Set the terms first. scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2026/07/30/g...
scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org
Guest Post — The Third Time is NOT the Charm: Who Will Own How AI Participates in Scholarship? - The Scholarly Kitchen
Today's guest post warns the community that, in the AI era, we cannot keep building the pieces that lay the foundation and letting someone else own what gets built on top of it.
000 0
krishnakumarv.bsky.social @krishnakumarv.bsky.social · 12/08/2026
32 of 35 students pasted an unedited AI answer and failed a hidden-prompt trap. Same trick works in peer review: authors hiding instructions to sway AI reviewers. Ownership is the fix, not detection. www.techspot.com/news/113243-...
techspot.com
Professor's invisible prompt trap catches 32 students cheating on their midterm with AI
In an online discussion post, Alcorn State University history professor Dr. Jason Gibson posed a question that represented part of his students' midterm. It was about the...
000 0
krishnakumarv.bsky.social @krishnakumarv.bsky.social · 11/08/2026
About 40% of PLOS authors now opt to publish their peer-review reports, and those papers get retracted less often. Not proof that open review prevents problems, but a good sign for transparency. I'd like more journals to offer it. What say? www.nature.com/articles/d41...
nature.com
Papers with open peer-review reports are less likely to be retracted
Researchers say that transparent publishing practices could be associated with research quality, but more evidence is needed.
010 0
krishnakumarv.bsky.social @krishnakumarv.bsky.social · 10/08/2026
Researchers are posting replication studies onto PubPeer, linked to the originals. Replications are not scarce, they are just hard to find. This should be a mandate for scholarly infrastructure, and publishers should push for it as a collective. www.nature.com/articles/d41...
nature.com
Will making ‘replication studies’ easier to find help science self-correct?
Project on peer-review platform Pubpeer aims to make replication studies more visible.
000 0
krishnakumarv.bsky.social @krishnakumarv.bsky.social · 07/08/2026
About nine in ten biomedical preprints say substantially what the published paper ends up saying. Is that preprints being good, or peer review not doing much? Going by COVID, I lean toward the second. www.nature.com/articles/d41...
nature.com
000 0
krishnakumarv.bsky.social @krishnakumarv.bsky.social · 06/08/2026
US/Canada authors are accepted at 3.3x China-based ones. Gap starts at desk screening, not peer review. My guess: integrity-screening flags shared surnames. Global South needs better solutions here. www.timeshighereducation.com/news/chinese...
timeshighereducation.com
Chinese authors far less likely to be published in top journals
Study analysing submissions to elite titles finds scholars based in China, or who have Chinese-sounding names, struggle to get work past ‘gatekeepers’
000 0
krishnakumarv.bsky.social @krishnakumarv.bsky.social · 06/08/2026
More than half of AI unicorns have never led a single paper or preprint. I had never thought to ask whether they should. What I would like is their researchers engaging with the academic ones. www.science.org/content/arti...
science.org
AI’s top startups are barely publishing their research
More than half of AI “unicorns” have never published a paper or preprint
000 0
krishnakumarv.bsky.social @krishnakumarv.bsky.social · 05/08/2026
Apparently, this is how you game peer review in the AI era. Reword your paper, especially the abstract. Find out which model will review it. Then insert a polite hidden prompt asking for a good grade, which worked up to 80% of the time on top models.
arxiv.org
Does AI Reviewer See the Full Picture? Attacking and Defending Multimodal Peer Review
The integration of Large Language Models (LLMs) and Multimodal LLMs (MLLMs) into scientific peer-review workflows introduces novel and significant risks for adversarial manipulation, especially given…
000 0