In the last five or so years, large language models (LLMs) have transformed from a novel regurgitator of haphazardly stitched together sentences to an almost ‘human’ personality standing by our side as we tackle life. Whilst the perceived humanity of these models is the topic for perhaps a future blogpost, it is almost undeniable to understate the impact of LLMs in our daily lives. Do you need someone to proofread your essay you’ve spent hours drafting? GPT (or one of its many counterparts) has you covered. Need help drafting an email from scratch? No problem. Want to write and/or heavily edit an entire academic article which would typically require days, if not weeks, of research? Surely just needs a push of a button… right?

Despite tremendous advances in LLMs, key issues mean they are not yet a fully dependable addition to our writing endeavours. They are known to fail when asked to generate new content with only a basic prompt. Some of these failures have made headlines ¹. Some of the scariest instances are those of hallucinated information ^2–4 . This refers to the phenomenon where AI tools generate convincing information which is factually inaccurate or simply fabricated ² . In Belgium, the Ghent university rector came under fire for citing quotes, supposedly from influential thinkers, which were later found to be AI-hallucinations ¹.

Whilst there are numerous examples of the poorly cited and often AI-hallucinated papers falling through the cracks of the peer-review process, today we focus on a Frontiers in Microbiology reviewtitled ‘Broadly neutralizing monoclonal antibodies against influenza A viruses: current insights and future directions’ ⁵. This paper attempts to provide an overview of the current landscape of monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) which are being developed to confer protection against influenza A, highlighting ‘technological advances, clinical performance, and scalability’. However, it contains many of the hallmarks of text that has been created or edited with generative AI, despite the generative AI statement stating ‘The author(s) declared that Generative AI was not used in the creation of this manuscript.’