{"slug": "arxiv-is-rate-limiting-submissions-because-it-cant-keep-up-with-ai-slop", "title": "arXiv Is Rate Limiting Submissions Because It Can’t Keep up With AI Slop", "summary": "ArXiv announced a new rate-limit policy on October 1, 2026, capping researchers at two submissions per calendar month and three active submissions at any time, after the preprint repository received 40,363 submissions in September 2026 — up from 20,569 in September 2024 and 9,869 in September 2016. arXiv said AI-written papers have overwhelmed its volunteer moderators, with editorial advisory council chair Thomas Dietterich, an Oregon State University professor emeritus, stating that \"a relatively small proportion of authors are submitting a large number of low-quality papers and consuming a disproportionate fraction of the moderators' time.\" The repository has previously stopped accepting review and position papers in computer science, required endorsements for new authors in January 2026, and said in May 2026 it would ban AI-slop submitters for a year.", "body_md": "arXiv, an open-access repository where researchers publish preprint academic research, has announced it will [__rate limit submissions__](https://blog.arxiv.org/2026/10/01/updated-rate-limit-policy/?ref=404media.co) because it has been inundated with AI-written papers. A researcher can now only send in two pieces per calendar month and have a total of three active submissions at any given time. In a [__blog post__](https://blog.arxiv.org/2026/10/01/updated-rate-limit-policy/?ref=404media.co) about the change, arXiv said AI has made it too easy to spam the publisher’s inbox and its volunteer moderation team is overwhelmed.\n\n“The heart of arXiv’s process for detecting and rejecting low-quality papers is our many volunteer moderators,” Thomas Dietterich, an Oregon State University professor emeritus and the chair of arXiv’s editorial advisory council said in a statement. “We are so grateful that they donate their time and expertise every day. However, a relatively small proportion of authors are submitting a large number of low-quality papers and consuming a disproportionate fraction of the moderators’ time. This is unfair to authors who continue to submit quality papers — their papers can be delayed for days or weeks as a result.”\n\nAccording to arXiv, it received 9,869 submissions in September 2016, 20,569 submissions in September 2024, and 40,363 submissions in September 2026. Submissions on the site have doubled in the last two years and have sextupled in the computer science category.\n\nAI is driving this surge in multiple ways. Researchers are using LLM to parse massive data sets, write code, and design portions of experiments; some are also using AI to write the papers. “arXiv policy [__permits authors to employ AI__](https://info.arxiv.org/help/moderation/index.html?ref=404media.co#policy-for-authors-use-of-generative-ai-language-tools) as a tool in support of their research as long as it is disclosed and the research meets arXiv’s standards of scholarly interest and advances the field of research,” arXiv said in its rate limiting blog. “However, many of the submissions that arXiv is now receiving do not satisfy these requirements.”\n\narXiv said it’s seen an increase in “thin papers of narrow scope” as well as [__salami papers__](https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3900084/?ref=404media.co) — where researchers write multiple articles based on one study. “There is also a marked increase in dense, AI-written papers. AI tools are making it easy for authors to flood arXiv and other repositories with these low-value papers,” it said.\n\nRate limiting was already part of arXiv’s policy, but it was originally left to each individual moderator’s discretion. “This policy update strives to fairly distribute the incredibly valuable work of our volunteer moderators who check that submissions meet these standards,” the publisher said.\n\nThis new policy is another part of a long battle the publication is having with AI-powered slop and spam. A little less than a year ago, the archive [__stopped accepting__](https://www.404media.co/arxiv-changes-rules-after-getting-spammed-with-ai-generated-research-papers/) review articles and position papers in the computer science category and cited low effort LLM-written articles as the reason. In January it started [__requiring new authors__](https://blog.arxiv.org/2026/01/21/attention-authors-updated-endorsement-policy/?ref=404media.co) to receive an endorsement from an existing author in the system. Previously the publisher accepted an academic email address as the sole qualifier. In May, arXiv took things a step farther and said it would [__ban researchers__](https://www.404media.co/new-arxiv-rules-ai-generated-papers-ban/) who submitted AI slop from the site for a year.", "url": "https://wpnews.pro/news/arxiv-is-rate-limiting-submissions-because-it-cant-keep-up-with-ai-slop", "canonical_source": "https://www.404media.co/arxiv-is-rate-limiting-submissions-because-it-cant-keep-up-with-ai-slop/", "published_at": "2026-10-05 15:29:49+00:00", "updated_at": "2026-10-05 15:49:22.957672+00:00", "lang": "en", "topics": ["ai-policy", "ai-ethics", "artificial-intelligence", "ai-research"], "entities": ["arXiv", "Thomas Dietterich", "Oregon State University", "404 Media"], "also_reported_by": [], "alternates": {"html": "https://wpnews.pro/news/arxiv-is-rate-limiting-submissions-because-it-cant-keep-up-with-ai-slop", "markdown": "https://wpnews.pro/news/arxiv-is-rate-limiting-submissions-because-it-cant-keep-up-with-ai-slop.md", "text": "https://wpnews.pro/news/arxiv-is-rate-limiting-submissions-because-it-cant-keep-up-with-ai-slop.txt", "jsonld": "https://wpnews.pro/news/arxiv-is-rate-limiting-submissions-because-it-cant-keep-up-with-ai-slop.jsonld"}}