

Yeah given the quality of AI outputs they could just read the papers to spot it … you know … do their jobs? I mean there’s a few layers here for thesis review, the supervisor, the professor, the other peer reviewers. They are all supposed to review the paper and at least some of the data that led to its production.
If the peer review are unable to differentiate between student output and AI output then they are either incompetent or they are inundated with absolute garbage. The latter also suggests the former is true.