[TYPES] AI-generated conference submissions

[mukesh tiwari]

Hi all, 

This year IJCAI [1] decided to charge USD 100 per submission to improve its review process:

**Under IJCAI-ECAI-2026 Primary Paper Initiative, for every submission the fee of USD 100 will have to be paid. That fee is waived for primary paper i.e. papers’ for which none of the authors appear on any other submission to IJCAI-ECAI-2026. The initiative applies to the main track, Survey track and all special tracks, excluding the Journal Track, the Sister Conferences Track, Early Career Highlights, Competitions, Demos and the Doctoral Consortium.** 

And, I think, it would also avoid situations such as **entirely AI-generated conference submissions**. The money however needs to be calibrated according to countries (developing and developed) so that it deters entirely AI-generated content. Also, CCS [2] has an explicit policy **Policy on the Use of Generative AI and LLMs** but Jonathan has already mentioned along these lines because it an ACM conference. 

Best, 
Mukesh 


[1] https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://2026.ijcai.org/primary-paper-initiative/__;!!IBzWLUs!Rip7eH1z4H-Vg7l0ARU41ERZL4fk-exsGxyonWFojm_UotXaP97GxjDMFGEfCW5o0-aWqRvtSkLOtTSSTkBnapCiZHQZr2dKNxycCg$  
[2] https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.sigsac.org/ccs/CCS2026/call-for/call-for-papers.html__;!!IBzWLUs!Rip7eH1z4H-Vg7l0ARU41ERZL4fk-exsGxyonWFojm_UotXaP97GxjDMFGEfCW5o0-aWqRvtSkLOtTSSTkBnapCiZHQZr2fDmCc56g$  


> On 16 Mar 2026, at 20:03, Stephanie Balzer <stephanie.balzer at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> [ The Types Forum, http://lists.seas.upenn.edu/mailman/listinfo/types-list  ]
> 
> Dear all,
> 
> I have now been numerous times on the receiving end on a what it appears to me (almost) entirely AI-generated conference submissions that I was assigned to review.  Of course I have no proof, but to me it was pretty obvious.  The submissions in question consist of an amalgamation of meaningful words (sometimes not entirely from the context the paper ought to be about), are generally well written, although meaningless, and even come backed up with some rules with horizontal lines and proof sketches (sometimes from various contexts).  That catch, however, is that the whole composition doesn't make sense.
> 
> What are we going to do about this as a community?
> 
> I have numerous concerns here: My immediate concern is that I do not like to spend my time on such submissions.  Even though it's quite obvious immediately that the paper is meaningless, it still takes some time to make sure and justify the verdict.  Another concern I have is the risk that, under time pressure, no due diligence is done, and we may end up accepting such a paper.
> 
> As a first step we may require authors to declare whether AI was used in preparing their submission and what for and we delimit what uses are permitted.
> 
> Looking forward to your thoughts,
> 
> Stephanie
>