Researchers hide prompts to manipulate AI peer review
Nikkei found hidden prompts in 17 preprints on arXiv that instructed AI tools to give the papers positive reviews and ignore negatives. The manuscripts were linked to 14 academic institutions, including Waseda University, KAIST, Peking University, the National University of Singapore, the University of Washington and Columbia University. At least one paper was set to be withdrawn, while some researchers defended the prompts as a check on reviewers who improperly use AI.
- Company involved
- Multiple academic institutions
- AI system involved
- arXiv
1 source article · read the reporting →
Anonymous Spanish Lawyer (Tribunal Constitucional): AI-hallucinated content in court filing, Formal Reprimand (Apercibimiento) + Referral to Barcelona Bar for Disc
The AI system generated hallucinated content that was submitted in a court filing, potentially misleading the court.
1 source article · read the reporting →
Australian education ministers scrap NAPLAN robot marking
The Education Council decided not to use automated essay scoring for NAPLAN writing tests, dropping a proposal by ACARA to have computers mark English tasks. Teachers' unions had campaigned against the plan, and an academic warned that the software would reward verbose gibberish and could not assess creativity. The decision was made in December 2017 and announced in January 2018.
- Company involved
- Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority (ACARA)
10 source articles · read the reporting →
Mag 7 Ltd. et al. v. Tederi et al. (District Court, Tel Aviv-Yafo): AI-hallucinated content in court filing, Monetary Sanction;…
The AI generated fabricated case law that was submitted to the court, affecting the legal proceedings.
1 source article · read the reporting →
Deloitte to refund Australian government after AI-generated report errors
Deloitte used generative AI (Azure OpenAI GPT-4o) to help produce an independent assurance review for Australia's Department of Employment and Workplace Relations. The report, published in July 2025, contained multiple errors including non-existent academic references and a fabricated court case. After the errors were flagged, Deloitte acknowledged the AI use and agreed to refund the final instalment of the A$439,000 contract. The report was corrected, but its substance and recommendations remained unchanged.
- Company involved
- Deloitte
- AI system involved
- Azure OpenAI GPT-4o
5 source articles · read the reporting →
RealPage's YieldStar algorithm pushes rents higher for tenants
RealPage's YieldStar algorithm uses private competitor data to recommend rent increases for apartment units. Landlords adopt up to 90% of the suggestions, leading to higher rents for tenants. Critics allege the software may facilitate indirect price-fixing in violation of antitrust law. The company denies wrongdoing and says the software helps eliminate collusion.
- Company involved
- RealPage
- AI system involved
- YieldStar
10 source articles · read the reporting →
Joel A. Rivera v. Triad Properties Corporation, et al. (N.D. Alabama): AI-hallucinated content in court filing, Public Reprimand; Disqualification; Bar…
The AI generated fabricated legal citations that were presented to the court, affecting the defendants and the judicial process.
- Company involved
- Burrill Watkins LLC
- AI system involved
- ChatGPT
1 source article · read the reporting →
Yasiel Puig Valdes v. All3Media America, LLC, et al. (SCA California (Los Angeles)): AI-hallucinated content in court filing, Referral
The AI generated fake legal citations that were included in a court filing, potentially harming the plaintiff's case.
- AI system involved
- ChatGPT
1 source article · read the reporting →
Kalala v. Coopérative d'habitation La Fraternité Micheloise (CS Québec): AI-hallucinated content in court filing, Monetary Sanction
The AI generated fabricated case law that was included in a court filing, misleading the court and resulting in sanctions against the litigant.
1 source article · read the reporting →
Proctorio's exam proctoring system allows human agents to review student feeds despite privacy claims
A security researcher analyzed Proctorio's Chrome extension and found evidence that the system allows human agents to review students' room scans and live ID checks, contrary to Proctorio's claims that only professors can access recordings. The system flags students based on behavioral metrics and can terminate exams. The researcher also raised concerns about discrimination against low-income students and privacy violations.
- Company involved
- Proctorio
- AI system involved
- Proctorio
10 source articles · read the reporting →
Unnamed Brazilian litigant (): AI-hallucinated content in court filing, Appeal partially granted (reintegration suspended, rent imposed), but
AI-generated fake court precedents were included in a legal appeal, leading to sanctions against the litigant for bad-faith litigation.
- AI system involved
- ChatGPT
1 source article · read the reporting →
The People v. Raziel Ruiz Alvarez (CA California): AI-hallucinated content in court filing, Published order; monetary sanction payable by Counsel…
The AI generated fabricated legal citations that were included in a court filing, affecting the defendant's legal representation and the court's resources.
- Company involved
- Attorney Siddell
1 source article · read the reporting →
Ramirez v. Humala (E.D. New York): AI-hallucinated content in court filing, Monetary sanction jointly imposed on counsel and firm; order…
The AI generated nonexistent case citations that were filed in court, misleading the court and opposing counsel.
1 source article · read the reporting →
FTC settles with Sitejabber over reviews from customers who had not received goods
The US Federal Trade Commission has charged Sitejabber, an AI-enabled review platform, with deceiving consumers by publishing ratings and reviews submitted at the point of purchase, before buyers had received or experienced the products. The FTC alleges this artificially inflated average ratings and review counts for its clients. Sitejabber has agreed to a proposed consent order prohibiting it from making such misrepresentations in the future.
- Company involved
- Sitejabber
- AI system involved
- Sitejabber
10 source articles · read the reporting →
United States v. Hayes (E.D. California): AI-hallucinated content in court filing, Formal Sanction Imposed + Written Reprimand
The AI-generated fictitious citation was submitted in a motion to unseal, affecting the defendant's legal proceedings.
- Company involved
- Federal Public Defender's Office, Eastern District of California
1 source article · read the reporting →
Retorio AI personality test swayed by candidate appearance in BR experiment
Bayerischer Rundfunk journalists conducted experiments with Retorio's AI video interview analysis tool. The AI, which assesses personality traits from short videos, produced different scores when the same actress changed her appearance (glasses, headscarf, wig) or the video background and lighting were altered. The start-up Retorio acknowledged that the AI considers external image, similar to a human interviewer. Experts warned that such software could perpetuate stereotypes and unfairly affect job candidates.
- AI system involved
- Retorio AI
10 source articles · read the reporting →
Recurso de Suplicación 0005472/2025 (T.S.X. Galicia): AI-hallucinated content in court filing, Bar Referral
The AI generated false legal citations that were included in a court filing, misleading the court and potentially harming the client's case.
1 source article · read the reporting →
Michael L. Ruiz v. Magellan Financial & Insurance Services (2) (D. Arizona): AI-hallucinated content in court filing, Formal public reprimand
AI-hallucinated fake quotations were included in court filings submitted by counsel Elizabeth Tate, misleading the court.
1 source article · read the reporting →
Aguilar v. The Crawford Group, Inc. (D. Massachusetts): AI-hallucinated content in court filing, Adverse Costs Order; Pro hac vice status…
The AI generated fake legal citations that were included in a court filing, misleading the court and opposing counsel.
- Company involved
- Lindemann Law Firm
1 source article · read the reporting →
Thomas Raynard James v. Detective Kevin Conley, et al. (S.D. Florida): AI-hallucinated content in court filing, Bar Referral
AI generated hallucinated content in a court filing, affecting the legal process and the lawyers who filed it.
1 source article · read the reporting →
Akerlund v. Atlas Air, Inc., et al. (11th Cir. CA): AI-hallucinated content in court filing, Bar Referral
The system generated fake legal citations that were included in a court filing, potentially misleading the court and prejudicing the client's case.
1 source article · read the reporting →
TOV Realty, LLC v. Suarez; Kosel Equity, LLC v. MacGregor (SC Connecticut): AI-hallucinated content in court filing, 6 hours CLE;…
The AI generated legal briefs containing fabricated citations, which were submitted to the Connecticut Supreme Court.
- Company involved
- GLG Law LLC
- AI system involved
- ChatGPT
1 source article · read the reporting →
Company fires HR team after ATS auto-rejects manager's CV due to filtering error
A company's applicant tracking system (ATS) auto-rejected qualified candidates' resumes for three months because it was filtering for the outdated framework AngularJS instead of the required Angular framework. The manager discovered the flaw by submitting his own CV under a pseudonym and found it was rejected within seconds. After the manager reported the issue to upper management, the company investigated and dismissed half of its HR team. No legal action or regulatory involvement is reported.
4 source articles · read the reporting →
In re Rosslyn2016, LLC, et al. (S.D. Texas (Bankruptcy)): AI-hallucinated content in court filing, CLE on generative AI; Civil Contempt;…
The AI generated fabricated legal citations that were submitted to the bankruptcy court.
1 source article · read the reporting →
