ArXiv, a major open repository for preprint research papers, has announced a strict new policy targeting researchers who rely too heavily on large language models without proper oversight. The organization, which has been hosted by Cornell University for over two decades and is now transitioning to independent nonprofit status, posted new guidelines on May 16, 2026. Thomas Dietterich, chair of arXiv's computer science section, stated that submissions containing clear evidence authors failed to verify AI-generated content will result in a one-year ban from the platform. Authors who violate this rule must also have future submissions accepted by a peer-reviewed venue before posting on arXiv. The new enforcement targets specific red flags including "hallucinated references" — fabricated citations that recent peer-reviewed research has found increasingly common in biomedical fields — as well as direct comments or correspondence with the LLM visible in the submission. Dietterich emphasized that this is not a blanket prohibition on using AI tools, but rather a requirement that researchers take "full responsibility" for all content, regardless of how it was generated. This means authors remain accountable for inappropriate language, plagiarized content, biased material, errors, and incorrect references that appear in their submissions. This policy builds on arXiv's previous efforts to address the proliferation of low-quality AI-generated papers. The platform had already implemented mandatory endorsements from established authors for first-time submitters. The move to independent nonprofit status is expected to help arXiv secure more funding to tackle issues like AI slop. The one-strike rule will require moderators to flag violations and section chairs to confirm evidence before penalties are imposed, and authors will retain the right to appeal decisions.