Between the two of us, we reviewed 22 paper submissions this summer, spread across NeurIPS , WACV , and TerraBytes (a geospatial workshop at ECCV). Fifteen of the 22 (68%) contained entirely fabricated citations, fabricated author lists for existing papers, and/or were clearly LLM-generated (e.g. hallucinated technical jargon, nonsensical writing, irrelevant citations). This is called being in the “slop trenches” (i.e. dealing with the output of AI slop cannons). Here we complain about this being mostly a waste of time, do a small lit review on the state of LLMs in scientific writing and reviewing, get Claude to generate questions for a Q&A, and release a bib-audit skill that Isaac cooked up. The table below shows the number of review assignments with fabricated citations, fabricated authors, or writing that was unmistakably LLM-generated, out of the total assignments for that venue.…