Compound Deception in Elite Peer Review: A Failure Mode Taxonomy of 100 Fabricated Citations at NeurIPS 2025

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2602.05930v1
• Date: Thu, 05 Feb 2026 17:43:35 GMT
• Title: Compound Deception in Elite Peer Review: A Failure Mode Taxonomy of 100 Fabricated Citations at NeurIPS 2025
• Authors: Samar Ansari,
• Abstract summary: Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used in academic writing, yet they frequently hallucinate by generating citations to sources that do not exist.<n>This study analyzes 100 AI-generated hallucinated citations that appeared in papers accepted by the 2025 Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems.<n>Despite review by 3-5 expert researchers per paper, these fabricated citations evaded detection, appearing in 53 published papers.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used in academic writing workflows, yet they frequently hallucinate by generating citations to sources that do not exist. This study analyzes 100 AI-generated hallucinated citations that appeared in papers accepted by the 2025 Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS), one of the world's most prestigious AI conferences. Despite review by 3-5 expert researchers per paper, these fabricated citations evaded detection, appearing in 53 published papers (approx. 1% of all accepted papers). We develop a five-category taxonomy that classifies hallucinations by their failure mode: Total Fabrication (66%), Partial Attribute Corruption (27%), Identifier Hijacking (4%), Placeholder Hallucination (2%), and Semantic Hallucination (1%). Our analysis reveals a critical finding: every hallucination (100%) exhibited compound failure modes. The distribution of secondary characteristics was dominated by Semantic Hallucination (63%) and Identifier Hijacking (29%), which often appeared alongside Total Fabrication to create a veneer of plausibility and false verifiability. These compound structures exploit multiple verification heuristics simultaneously, explaining why peer review fails to detect them. The distribution exhibits a bimodal pattern: 92% of contaminated papers contain 1-2 hallucinations (minimal AI use) while 8% contain 4-13 hallucinations (heavy reliance). These findings demonstrate that current peer review processes do not include effective citation verification and that the problem extends beyond NeurIPS to other major conferences, government reports, and professional consulting. We propose mandatory automated citation verification at submission as an implementable solution to prevent fabricated citations from becoming normalized in scientific literature.

Related papers

• GhostCite: A Large-Scale Analysis of Citation Validity in the Age of Large Language Models [22.147294042024836]
  Citations provide the basis for trusting scientific claims; when they are invalid or fabricated, this trust collapses.<n>With the advent of Large Language Models (LLMs), this risk has intensified.<n>We develop CiteVerifier, an open-source framework for large-scale citation verification.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-06T14:08:34Z)
• HalluCitation Matters: Revealing the Impact of Hallucinated References with 300 Hallucinated Papers in ACL Conferences [58.87954687016989]
  We analyze all papers published at ACL, NAACL, and EMNLP in 2024 and 2025.<n>Half of these papers were identified at EMNLP 2025, indicating that this issue is rapidly increasing.<n>More than 100 such papers were accepted as main conference and Findings papers at EMNLP 2025, affecting the credibility.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-26T17:48:23Z)
• The 17% Gap: Quantifying Epistemic Decay in AI-Assisted Survey Papers [0.0]
  "Hallucinated papers" are a known artifact, but the systematic degradation of valid citation chains remains unquantified.<n>We conducted a forensic audit of 50 recent survey papers in Artificial Intelligence published between September 2024 and January 2026.<n>We detect a persistent 17.0% Phantom Rate -- citations that cannot be resolved to any digital object despite aggressive forensic recovery.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-24T12:00:55Z)
• The Semantic Illusion: Certified Limits of Embedding-Based Hallucination Detection in RAG Systems [0.0]
  We apply hallucination prediction to RAG detection, transforming scores into decision sets with finite-sample coverage guarantees.<n>We analyze this failure through the lens of distributional tails, showing that while NLI models achieve acceptable AUC (0.81), the "hardest" hallucinations are semantically indistinguishable from faithful responses.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-12-17T04:22:28Z)
• Review of Hallucination Understanding in Large Language and Vision Models [65.29139004945712]
  We present a framework for characterizing both image and text hallucinations across diverse applications.<n>Our investigations reveal that hallucinations often stem from predictable patterns in data distributions and inherited biases.<n>This survey provides a foundation for developing more robust and effective solutions to hallucinations in real-world generative AI systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-26T09:23:08Z)
• A Data-Centric Approach To Generate Faithful and High Quality Patient Summaries with Large Language Models [11.218649399559691]
  Fine-tuning on hallucination-free data effectively reduces hallucinations from 2.60 to 1.55 per summary for Llama 2. We find that common quantitative metrics do not correlate well with faithfulness and quality.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-23T16:32:28Z)
• Fine-grained Hallucination Detection and Editing for Language Models [109.56911670376932]
  Large language models (LMs) are prone to generate factual errors, which are often called hallucinations. We introduce a comprehensive taxonomy of hallucinations and argue that hallucinations manifest in diverse forms. We propose a novel task of automatic fine-grained hallucination detection and construct a new evaluation benchmark, FavaBench.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-12T19:02:48Z)
• HalluciDoctor: Mitigating Hallucinatory Toxicity in Visual Instruction Data [102.56792377624927]
  hallucinations inherent in machine-generated data remain under-explored. We present a novel hallucination detection and elimination framework, HalluciDoctor, based on the cross-checking paradigm. Our method successfully mitigates 44.6% hallucinations relatively and maintains competitive performance compared to LLaVA.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-22T04:52:58Z)
• Factored Verification: Detecting and Reducing Hallucination in Summaries of Academic Papers [1.7100359620532977]
  We use Factored Verification to detect hallucinations in abstractive summaries. We estimate how often language models hallucinate when summarizing across multiple academic papers. The hallucinations we find are often subtle, so we advise caution when using models to synthesize academic papers.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-16T17:51:17Z)
• A Stitch in Time Saves Nine: Detecting and Mitigating Hallucinations of LLMs by Validating Low-Confidence Generation [76.34411067299331]
  Large language models often tend to 'hallucinate' which critically hampers their reliability. We propose an approach that actively detects and mitigates hallucinations during the generation process. We show that the proposed active detection and mitigation approach successfully reduces the hallucinations of the GPT-3.5 model from 47.5% to 14.5% on average.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-07-08T14:25:57Z)
• Don't Say What You Don't Know: Improving the Consistency of Abstractive Summarization by Constraining Beam Search [54.286450484332505]
  We analyze the connection between hallucinations and training data, and find evidence that models hallucinate because they train on target summaries that are unsupported by the source. We present PINOCCHIO, a new decoding method that improves the consistency of a transformer-based abstractive summarizer by constraining beam search to avoid hallucinations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-03-16T07:13:52Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.