Hate to be that guy, but this screams LLM-generated to me. Between the titles, the vague explanations, the vague concepts, and the overall amount of fluff to data, I'd bet good money that this was generated with an LLM.
It's not inherently bad to use an LLM for consistency, language and overall sprucing up, but this is taking it a bit too far. It seems like they've prompted it to explain some notes, but it's unsure how well it did, since the notes themselves (i.e. data, experiments, etc) are missing. And it seems poorly prompted in that it consists of lots of fluff paragraphs, devoid of core knowledge, going round and round explaining the same concepts with different words.
In the end the responsibility for the end product is alsways on the submitter. This whole paper could have been a prompt, and it's worrying that this is accepted at such a prestigious school.
It's not inherently bad to use an LLM for consistency, language and overall sprucing up, but this is taking it a bit too far. It seems like they've prompted it to explain some notes, but it's unsure how well it did, since the notes themselves (i.e. data, experiments, etc) are missing. And it seems poorly prompted in that it consists of lots of fluff paragraphs, devoid of core knowledge, going round and round explaining the same concepts with different words.
In the end the responsibility for the end product is alsways on the submitter. This whole paper could have been a prompt, and it's worrying that this is accepted at such a prestigious school.