Academia is a pretty demanding work environment, and having to do multiple roles, along with "publish or perish" culture and overall insufficient financial compensation, it's no wonder why so many people go to the industry or simply use LLMs for reviewing papers...

Still, since these people wouldn't be in academic positions anymore, they would need some kind of financial compensation for this (and also all reviewers, to be quite frank), which could come from the publication fees, I imagine

Maybe the question is how to rethink peer reviewing and broadening its practice. Maybe having a network of former PhDs that left academia to be first reviewers and filter out what should or shouldn't be reviewed by more experienced researchers?

We have way more PhDs, highly specialized people in their field, than positions in academia, and still only people in academic positions get to review papers. It's a very tight circle of people that can review each other's works, even though we have quite a few people around to share this load

Although reviewing papers is part of a researcher's job, it piles up with so many roles: writing grant proposals, teaching classes, grading tests and essays, supervising students and postdocs, starting up to date in their field and writing papers. No wonder one would use LLMs as shortcuts.

That's so so awesome!!!

I always feel shy about sending a message to a writer or musician I really like to tell them how much their art means to me! But I always buy extra books, digital music files on bandcamp or physical media to give. Support the artists you love, people!

Still, even though AI tools that help on searching references can really save us time, it removes the possibility of fortuitous findings along the way. Sometimes we find really cool and even useful stuff we didn't expect when pulling a thread of many papers looking for specific information

I'm not saying there are no interesting AI tools for helping researchers, especially when you're trying to tie things up finishing a paper, but we have to be mindful of what we use, how it works and its limitations
go.nature.com/48Z7vjr