Thomas Renault, Antonin Bergeaud, Clément Bosquet
arXiv 18 May 2026 · Econometrics
arXiv:2605.17979 · PDF · DOI · OpenAlex · Extracted main text
Kusumegi et al. (2025) study whether researchers' preprint output rises after adopting large language models (LLMs), dating adoption as the first month in which at least one submitted abstract exceeds an LLM-detection threshold. We show that this treatment-timing rule is mechanically related to output. The probability that at least one paper is flagged in a month is increasing in the number of papers submitted in that month, so detected-adoption months are disproportionately high-output months. An event study centered on first detection can therefore display positive post-event dynamics even when the flagging rule contains no information about true LLM adoption, because the omitted pre-treatment period is selected from months with no prior detection. We demonstrate this in a simulation: with i.i.d. productivity and no causal effect, first-detection timing generates a spurious positive post-treatment path. We also replicate the stacked event study of Kusumegi et al. (2025) and show that three placebo exercises (random paper-level assignment, neutral keyword flags, and a pre-ChatGPT observation window) each produce a similarly positive post-treatment pattern.
appendix boundary found by appendix_titled_section at “Supplementary Materials” · 75% of the source is main text. Read the extracted text to check this.
The works this paper leans on most, across its whole bibliography — not restricted to papers in our corpus. Ranked by composite intensity, which combines how often a work is mentioned, how many sections mention it, and how much of that falls in the main text rather than the appendix.
| Reference | Intensity | Mentions | Sections | Main text | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Kusumegi, Keigo and Yang, Xinyu and Ginsparg, Paul and de Vaan, Math… (2025) Scientific production in the era of large language models | 0.979 | 16 | 7 | 94% |
| 2 | Jonathan Roth and Pedro H.C. Sant’Anna and Alyssa Bilinski and John… (2023) What’s trending in difference-in-differences? A synthesis of the recent econometrics literature | 0.644 | 2 | 2 | 100% |
| 3 | de Chaisemartin, Clément and D’Haultfœuille, Xavier (2023) Two-way fixed effects and differences-in-differences with heterogeneous treatment effects: a survey | 0.644 | 2 | 2 | 100% |
Showing the top 3 of 3 scored citations.