CVPR - How to identify if an accepted paper has ethical issues (plagiarism)? [D]
Summary
A CVPR 2026 accepted paper is accused of copying equations, figures and key ideas from an earlier arXiv submission without citation, highlighting gaps in conference plagiarism checks.
Similar Articles
[NeurIPS 2026] Will you be submitting your code alongside your submissions? [D]
NeurIPS 2026 authors debate whether to submit code, balancing credibility gains against plagiarism fears.
How do you anonymize code for a conference submission? [D]
Author seeks advice on anonymizing GitHub repositories when submitting AI/ML papers to conferences.
Top AI conference uses AI detector to reject papers for allegedly being written by AI
NeurIPS 2026 used a proprietary AI-text detector to desk-reject papers for alleged AI policy violations without validating it on the target distribution; the same detector later flagged conference chairs' own papers as likely AI-written.
Research repository ArXiv will ban authors for a year if they let AI do all the work
ArXiv is implementing a new policy that bans authors for one year if submitted papers show clear evidence of unchecked AI generation, such as hallucinated references or LLM comments, reinforcing that authors are fully responsible for content regardless of how it was produced.
@tdietterich: Attention @arxiv authors: Our Code of Conduct states that by signing your name as an author of a paper, each author tak…
Tom Dietterich reminds arXiv authors that signing as an author means taking full responsibility for all contents, regardless of how they were generated, highlighting implications for AI-generated content.