The scary part is the editors, copyeditors and the reviewers not catching this. If they’re not catching casual LLM wording, how are they to be counted on to make sure the science behind the paper is good and valid?
They do not include the peer reviewers in their list of people who missed it. Which means that either the peer reviewers did pick it up and for some reason it didn’t get addressed (unlikely) or this was a straight up pay-to-play and whoever runs that particular bit of the racket for Elsevier fucked up.
The scary part is the editors, copyeditors and the reviewers not catching this. If they’re not catching casual LLM wording, how are they to be counted on to make sure the science behind the paper is good and valid?
They do not include the peer reviewers in their list of people who missed it. Which means that either the peer reviewers did pick it up and for some reason it didn’t get addressed (unlikely) or this was a straight up pay-to-play and whoever runs that particular bit of the racket for Elsevier fucked up.