“That nonsense sentence was an example of low-quality AI-generated content, colloquially known as AI slop.” So began Martin Keen, Master Inventor at IBM, in a recent discussion dissecting the pervasive issue of AI-generated content lacking substance and quality. Keen elaborated on the characteristics, underlying causes, and actionable strategies for both users and developers to mitigate this growing problem.
AI slop manifests in two primary forms: problematic phrasing and deficient content. The former is characterized by inflated language, such as the redundant phrase “it is important to note that,” and repetitive, formulaic constructs like "not only… but also." Over-the-top adjectives and peculiar formatting quirks, like em-dashes without spaces, further mark this style. These stylistic tics make AI-generated text a slog to read.
Beyond superficial phrasing, AI slop often suffers from content issues, primarily verbosity and false information. Large Language Models (LLMs) tend to be verbose by default, producing several sentences where one would suffice, or entire paragraphs devoid of useful insight. More critically, LLMs can "hallucinate," generating plausible-sounding text that is factually incorrect, presenting fabrications as truth. This low-quality content is easily proliferated at scale by automated content farms, contributing to a sea of undifferentiated, unoriginal material across the web.
The root causes of AI slop are embedded in how LLMs function. At their core, “LLMs are built on transformer neural networks that are trained to do one thing, and one thing is to predict the next word or the next token in a sequence: token-by-token generation.” This output-driven, rather than goal-driven, approach leads models to prioritize statistical likelihood over genuine meaning or conciseness. Additionally, training data bias plays a significant role; if the vast corpora of human-written text used for training contain repetitive phrases or common errors, the model will reproduce these patterns. Furthermore, the reward optimization process, often reinforcement learning from human feedback (RLHF), can inadvertently lead to "model collapse," where outputs converge into a narrow, perceived "high-scoring" style, sacrificing diversity and depth.
Combating AI slop requires a dual approach from both users and developers. Users can significantly improve output by being specific in their prompts, clearly defining desired tone, audience, and constraints. Providing examples of preferred style or format also helps LLMs, which are master pattern matchers, to generate more tailored responses. Crucially, users should iterate, engaging in conversational refinement rather than blindly accepting the first draft.
On the developer side, refining training data curation is paramount. As Keen aptly stated, “If the training set includes a lot of low-quality web text, the model will inevitably learn those patterns. So filter out all the bland SEO spam and sources with poor writing before using those sources to train or fine-tune models.” Developers should also implement nuanced reward model optimization, moving beyond simple helpfulness metrics to include objectives like brevity, correctness, and novelty. Finally, integrating retrieval systems, such as Retrieval Augmented Generation (RAG), allows models to access and cite real, verified documents, directly addressing the issue of hallucinations.
