[Garlef]

Maybe they should implement a graph based trust system:

You need your favourite academic gatekeeper (= thesis advisor) to vouch for you in order to be allowed to upload.

Then AI slop gets flagged and the shame spreads through the graph. And flaggings need to have evidence attached that can again be flagged.

[pred_]

The endorsement system already works along that line: https://info.arxiv.org/help/endorsement.html

It's probably not perfect but in practice, it seems to have been enough to get rid of the worst crackpotty spam.

[justinnk]

They already had a basic form of this for a while [1]

> arXiv requires that users be endorsed before submitting their first paper to arXiv or a new category.

[1] https://info.arxiv.org/help/endorsement.html

[dmos62]

I've often thought that similar trust systems would work well in social media, web search, etc., but I've never seen it implemented in a meaningful way. I wonder what I'm missing.

[IshKebab]

Lobsters has this I think. But it also means I've never posted there.

[ryangibb]

You mean like endorsement? https://info.arxiv.org/help/endorsement.html

[ChrisGreenHeur]

Science reduced to people with a phd?

[budman1]

not a bad first order filter.

can you think of a better one?

[awesome_dude]

The whole point of the scientific method was that we could ignore the source of the information, and were instead expected to focus on the value of the information based on supporting evidence (data).

If we go back to "Only people that have been inducted into the community can publish science" we're effectively saying that only the high priests can accrue knowledge.

I say this knowing full well that we have a massive problem in science on sorting the wheat from the chaff, have had so for a VERY long time, and AI is flooding the zone (thank you political commentator I despise) with absolute dross.