If you are an author whose work is on the ACM DL, I'd like to strongly encourage you to check the accuracy of the AI Summary of your paper, and send feedback to the ACM on this feature and the inaccuracies in your summary. See more here: https://dl.acm.org/generative-ai/summarizations
Please boost, repost, and otherwise steal this post to reach other authors.
In long:
The ACM has begun rolling out "Digital Library Premium" features. A very notable one is AI Summaries of papers, which displace the author written abstract with an AI generated summary of the paper on the front page for the paper.
Of the several I've checked, they all contain subtle inaccuracies that would VERY EASILY mislead even experts familiar with the work.
This is a HUGE DISSERVICE TO SCIENCE. These summaries might appear to make science more accessible, but subtle errors introduced into the authors original text is the very opposite of making science more accessible. This will mislead rather than educate.
The ACM has a feature to send feedback on these summaries. Open your DOI, and look for the "Feedback" button on the right of the page, or the "Send Feedback" link in the footer. (You might need to disable ad-blockers, as this services uses mopinion.com)
The ACM is requesting this feedback, and it's important to let them know that such "hallucinations" are not solvable:
These tools were designed in consultation with a diverse group of Digital Library stakeholders and will continue to evolve as Artificial Intelligence advances. We are continuously tuning our Foundational Model to optimize readability and we conduct regular audits for hallucinations and other errors. We are very interested in your thoughts and suggestions- please leave them by clicking the "Feedback" button on the far right of this page. If you find a problem with a specific AI-generated summary, please return to that summary and click the Feedback there.
More aggressively, you might email dl-team@hq.acm.org (also linked in the footer).