• Home
  • Technology
  • Gaming
  • Entertainment
  • World & Business
  • Science
  • Sports
  • AI
HomeTechnologyGamingEntertainmentWorld & BusinessScienceSportsAI
    • Home
    • Technology
    • Gaming
    • Entertainment
    • World & Business
    • Science
    • Sports
    • AI
    AI
    Report

    Across 240,000 edits, human editing reportedly often failed to erase human-AI differences in scientific abstracts

    The author says language-model editors often made strong abstracts worse and pointed readers to a COLM 2026 poster.

    Seth LazarSL
    Patrick Queiroz Da Silva @ COLM2026PQ
    2 Sources, ,

    TLDR

    A post about 240,000 edits to scientific abstracts says human editing often failed to erase differences between human and AI writing. The author also says language-model editors often made strong abstracts worse and invited readers to a poster presentation at COLM 2026.

    Combined views

    251

    2 Sources, first seen 2h ago

    Combined views

    251

    2 Sources, first seen 2h ago

    8 likes
    2h ago
    first seen 2h ago
    8 likes
    2 saves
    5 reposts
    2 saves
    5 reposts
    Featured Source

    Sentiment

    Positive——Negative

    Summary

    Not enough discussion yet.

    No sentiment analysis available yet.

    Sentiment

    Positive——Negative

    Summary

    Not enough discussion yet.

    No sentiment analysis available yet.

    Today's Rank

    —

    Not ranked yet

    Today's Rank

    —

    Not ranked yet

    2 Sources

    Patrick Queiroz Da Silva @ COLM2026@patrickqdasilvaPeople are surprisingly bad at humanizing AI-generated scientific writing Across 240k edits, humans often failed to erase human-AI writing differences, and LM editors often make strong abstracts worse Come find out more at #COLM2026 📍 Imperial Ballroom, Poster 58 🕟 Wed @ 4:302h
    Seth Lazar@sethlazarRT @patrickqdasilva: People are surprisingly bad at humanizing AI-generated scientific writing Across 240k edits, humans often failed to e…1h

    2 Sources

    Patrick Queiroz Da Silva @ COLM2026@patrickqdasilvaPeople are surprisingly bad at humanizing AI-generated scientific writing Across 240k edits, humans often failed to erase human-AI writing differences, and LM editors often make strong abstracts worse Come find out more at #COLM2026 📍 Imperial Ballroom, Poster 58 🕟 Wed @ 4:302h
    Seth Lazar@sethlazarRT @patrickqdasilva: People are surprisingly bad at humanizing AI-generated scientific writing Across 240k edits, humans often failed to e…1h