<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Ai-Research on BRYSGO</title><link>https://www.brysgo.com/tags/ai-research/</link><description>Recent content in Ai-Research on BRYSGO</description><generator>Hugo</generator><language>en-us</language><lastBuildDate>Thu, 11 Jun 2026 01:42:06 +0000</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://www.brysgo.com/tags/ai-research/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><item><title>Peer Review Was Already the Bottleneck. AI Just Made It Visible.</title><link>https://www.brysgo.com/post/2026-06-11-peer-review-was-already-the-bottleneck-ai-just-made-it-visible/</link><pubDate>Thu, 11 Jun 2026 01:42:06 +0000</pubDate><guid>https://www.brysgo.com/post/2026-06-11-peer-review-was-already-the-bottleneck-ai-just-made-it-visible/</guid><description>&lt;p&gt;The interesting thing about the AI-generated paper flood isn&amp;rsquo;t that bad papers are getting through — it&amp;rsquo;s that the system&amp;rsquo;s breaking point was always verification, not writing, and we spent decades optimizing the wrong end.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;I&amp;rsquo;ve been watching the hand-wringing about AI and academic publishing, and most of it misses the real story. The conversation is framed as: AI is producing garbage and corrupting science. But that&amp;rsquo;s not quite right. The more precise framing is: AI dropped the cost of producing a paper low enough to finally stress-test a system that was never built to scale, and now we&amp;rsquo;re watching in real time as the cracks that were always there become impossible to ignore.&lt;/p&gt;</description></item></channel></rss>