“Two clearest examples so far this year, are the now retracted paper with the above-mentioned rat and a new lithium battery paper, with an opening sentence clearly written by an LLM.”
Our reading, the sentence that was checked:
In 2024 so far, a now-retracted paper with an AI-generated rat image and a lithium battery paper with an LLM-written opening sentence are the clearest examples of GenAI contaminating science.
Assessment: Unresolved Evidence as of
Where and when Gary Marcus wrote it
Marcus on AI, The Year of the Big-Balled Rat, paragraph 2.
- Said
- Source observed
- live page, full text, public
- Evidence as of
- the cutoff for this assessment
- Assessment recorded
- assessment marcus-the-year-of-the-big-balled-rat-4c8f11-a1
We recorded 8 claims from this post. See every claim from this post.
The wording above is the version this site observed on 2026-10-29. The source may have been edited after 2024-03-14. This page does not claim the wording was captured then.
What the claim commits to
- Kind
- Observation
- Deadline, as the speaker wrote it
- None stated. This site does not add one.
- Deadline state when assessed
- No horizon
- Deadline state on 2026-10-29
- No horizon (the release’s reference date)
From the speaker
- Two clearest examples so far this year
- the now retracted paper with the above-mentioned rat
- a new lithium battery paper
- an opening sentence clearly written by an LLM
Our interpretation
- Assess the two factual examples together: an AI-illustrated rat paper already retracted by March 14, and a publicly available lithium-battery paper whose introduction contained unmistakable chatbot-response wording.
- 'Clearest' expresses the speaker's assessment of the examples; no objective ranking among all scientific publications is supplied.
- 'Opening sentence' is read as the opening of the introduction, rather than the abstract.
- The stated period is January 1 through March 14, 2024.
Counts as supported if: Reliable records establish both that the rat paper contained AI-generated imagery and had been retracted by the post date, and that the lithium-battery paper already contained the described LLM-style opening by that date.
Counts as contradicted if: Reliable records establish that either factual example was materially misdescribed: the rat paper lacked AI imagery or was not yet retracted, or the lithium paper lacked the alleged opening during the target period.
Retrospective: these criteria were written after the outcome was public.
Current assessment
Was it true for the period described?
Outcome: Unresolved
The record was checked, and the evidence available by the cutoff does not settle it.
Scored on a plain reading. The speaker named no measure for this claim, so it was judged on the reading an informed reader would take, stated below under our interpretation. Both reviews had to find that reading fair.
- Evidence as of
- Deadline state when assessed
- No horizon
- Assessment recorded
- Policy version
- 2026-10-28.7
Rationale
The rat-paper example is established: the authors disclosed Midjourney use, and Frontiers retracted the paper on February 16. An accessible March 17 account also reproduces the lithium paper's chatbot-style opening. However, the original lithium paper was inaccessible through the required reader, and the retrieved corroboration did not independently establish its text by March 14. The combined claim remains unresolved under the specified evidence rules. This is an access and historical-version gap, not evidence that Marcus was wrong.
Limitations
- The factual examples are strongly corroborated, but only the rat example was verified within the target period.
- Several promising sources could not be read or returned unrelated content.
- The assessment does not test the subjective ranking expressed by 'clearest'.
Evidence (3 items)
Supports the claim: Frontiers Editorial Office,
This retraction was approved by the Chief Executive Editor of Frontiers.
Why it matters here: The notice identifies the Guo, Dong and Hao paper and dates its retraction to February 16. Its preceding paragraph connects the action to concerns about AI-generated figures and inadequate scientific rigor.
- Publisher
- Frontiers Editorial Office
- Kind of source
- Company disclosure: the company describing itself, not an independent finding
- Describes events of
- Public from
Supports the claim: Frontiers in Cell and Developmental Biology; Xinyu Guo, Liang Dong and Dingjun Hao,
generated by Midjourney
Why it matters here: The original paper discloses Midjourney-generated images and identifies Figure 1 as illustrating cells from rat testes. This establishes the AI provenance of the rat-paper example.
- Publisher
- Frontiers in Cell and Developmental Biology; Xinyu Guo, Liang Dong and Dingjun Hao
- Kind of source
- Peer-reviewed paper
- Describes events of
- Public from
Context only: The Data Blog; Philippe Fournier-Viger,
possible introduction for your topic:
Why it matters here: This dated account corroborates the alleged opening and identifies the battery paper. Its observation falls three days after the target period, so it is not decisive evidence of the version available by March 14.
- Publisher
- The Data Blog; Philippe Fournier-Viger
- Kind of source
- Secondary summary
- Describes events of
- Public from
What would settle it
A readable original or archived lithium-paper version, or a reliably dated contemporaneous reproduction, showing the introductory boilerplate publicly available by March 14, 2024 would complete the supporting evidence.
Where it was said (1)
Said once in the sources this register covers.
: Marcus on AI, The Year of the Big-Balled Rat
Two clearest examples so far this year, are the now retracted paper with the above-mentioned rat and a new lithium battery paper, with an opening sentence clearly written by an LLM.
- Where
- paragraph 2
- Published
- 2024-03-14
- Source observed
- , live page
- Access
- full text, public
History
Assessment versions
- Assessment marcus-the-year-of-the-big-balled-rat-4c8f11-a1: Current. Outcome: Unresolved. Evidence as of 2026-10-28. Public date not recorded.
Recorded events
Assessment publishedBy this site
First assessment published after both reviews and the final-text check passed.
About assessment marcus-the-year-of-the-big-balled-rat-4c8f11-a1.