arXiv imposes 1-year submission ban for AI-hallucinated citations

arXiv has rolled out a new enforcement policy targeting one of the most visible failure modes of LLM-assisted writing: fabricated references. Authors caught submitting papers with hallucinated citations — references to works that do not exist — will face a one-year ban from submitting to the preprint server. The rule was flagged publicly by researcher Thomas Dietterich.

The policy reflects mounting frustration in the academic community over the volume of low-quality, AI-generated submissions reaching preprint repositories. Hallucinated citations are particularly corrosive because they fake the scaffolding of scholarly credibility, making sloppy or generated work appear well-grounded until a reader actually tries to follow the references. A blanket submission ban is a sharper deterrent than the usual quiet rejection, signaling that arXiv now treats fabricated references as a form of misconduct rather than an honest mistake.

For the broader research-tooling ecosystem, the move sets a precedent other venues are likely to follow. It also raises practical questions about detection — verifying citations at scale is non-trivial — and about authorial responsibility when LLMs are used as drafting aids. The implicit message: writers, not models, are accountable for what ends up between the citation brackets.