AI写综述时17%的引用是假的，破坏了科研可复现性。
The 17% Gap: Quantifying Epistemic Decay in AI-Assisted Survey Papers
- 用多源验证法检测论文引用真伪，区分格式错误与虚假引用。
- 发现17%引用无法找到对应数字对象，其中78.5%因解析失败导致。
- 揭示AI助手让研究者变懒，标题对但元数据错，导致文献链断裂。
大型语言模型在科学写作中虽提升效率，但可能引入信息熵。尽管'虚构论文'已知存在，但有效引用链的系统性退化尚未量化。我们对2024年9月至2026年1月期间发表的50篇人工智能领域综述论文（共5,514条引用）进行了法医审计。采用结合DOI解析、Crossref元数据分析、Semantic Scholar查询和模糊文本匹配的混合验证流程，区分格式错误（'粗心'）与可验证不存在（'幽灵引用'）。检测到持续存在的17.0%幽灵引用率——即经多重法医恢复仍无法定位任何数字对象的引用。诊断分类显示三种故障模式：纯幻觉（5.1%）、虚构标识符但有真实标题（16.4%）、解析导致的匹配失败（78.5%）。纵向分析显示趋势平坦（+0.07个百分点/月），表明高熵引用行为已稳定为该领域的固有特征。人工智能综述文献的科学引用图谱呈现大规模'链接腐烂'现象。这暗示一种机制：AI工具充当'懒惰的研究助理'，检索正确标题但虚构元数据，从而切断可复现科学所需的数字溯源链。
原文摘要 · Abstract (English)
The adoption of Large Language Models (LLMs) in scientific writing promises efficiency but risks introducing informational entropy. While "hallucinated papers" are a known artifact, the systematic degradation of valid citation chains remains unquantified. We conducted a forensic audit of 50 recent survey papers in Artificial Intelligence (N=5,514 citations) published between September 2024 and January 2026. We utilized a hybrid verification pipeline combining DOI resolution, Crossref metadata analysis, Semantic Scholar queries, and fuzzy text matching to distinguish between formatting errors ("Sloppiness") and verifiable non-existence ("Phantoms). We detect a persistent 17.0% Phantom Rate -- citations that cannot be resolved to any digital object despite aggressive forensic recovery. Diagnostic categorization reveals three distinct failure modes: pure hallucinations (5.1%), hallucinated identifiers with valid titles (16.4%), and parsing-induced matching failures (78.5%). Longitudinal analysis reveals a flat trend (+0.07 pp/month), suggesting that high-entropy citation practices have stabilized as an endemic feature of the field. The scientific citation graph in AI survey literature exhibits "link rot" at scale. This suggests a mechanism where AI tools act as "lazy research assistants," retrieving correct titles but hallucinating metadata, thereby severing the digital chain of custody required for reproducible science.
Thank you to arXiv for use of its open access interoperability. PaperDance 不是 arXiv 官方产品；中文卡片由大模型生成，请以原文为准。