--- title: 'Software Daily Summary: What Happened on October 31, 2026' headline: Heng Li urges editors to reject suspected AI-written reviews description: The researcher says AI reviews can burden authors with weak or excessive feedback, but their effect in a standard response process has not been tested. url: https://thebench.bio/news/software/2026-10-31 topic: software date: '2026-10-31' covers: - '2026-10-31' date_published: '2026-11-01T00:01:57Z' date_modified: '2026-11-01T00:01:57Z' tags: - Software sources: 1 publisher: TheBench.Bio --- # Software Daily Summary: What Happened on October 31, 2026 **Heng Li urges editors to reject suspected AI-written reviews** The researcher says AI reviews can burden authors with weak or excessive feedback, but their effect in a standard response process has not been tested. ## Today in brief Heng Li argues that editors should be able to discard peer reviews they suspect were fully generated by AI, citing weak judgment, nitpicking and excessive length. [1] ## AI reviews and author responses Li's concern centers on review processes that require authors to answer every reviewer comment, including AI-generated ones. [1] He says one study found authors rated human reviews more highly than AI reviews on most measures, while another surveyed authors after AI systems reviewed 23,000 AAAI-26 submissions. [1] In that survey, authors preferred AI reviews in more categories but cited weak overall judgment, nitpicking and excessive length as leading flaws. [1] Li says the AAAI-26 study did not test AI reviews in a typical process where authors respond point by point, and that he found no study assessing them in a realistic standard review cycle. [1] He recommends that editors discard reviews they detect or strongly suspect were fully AI-generated. [1] ## Sources 1. [Is AI review better than human review?](), Heng Li, 2026-10-31 --- TheBench.Bio wrote this from the reporting cited above, with a language model drafting and editing. [1]: