A few months ago, a scientific paper went viral for all the wrong reasons. Specifically, it went viral because it featured an A.I.-generated image of a mouse with an enormous member, paired alongside a grapevine’s worth of balls.

Somehow, this paper slipped through peer review. And now, the fact that this paper got published at all is having scientists of all sorts questioning the data that’s been published in scientific journals recently.

In short, the number of research papers has exploded in recent years — over three million annually — making it hard to identify what’s truly valuable. Peer reviewers, who work for free, are also overwhelmed, and the system is straining under the weight of sheer volume.

Not helping matters is academia’s “publish or perish” culture, which pressures scientists to produce as many papers as possible, even if the findings are trivial or repetitive. So, if you’re a scientist in need of something to publish, you can see why “generate me a picture of a mouse with a huge hog” might be tempting.

Basically, scientists agree that reform is needed, but no one is sure how to do it — and, crucially, no one wants to pay for it. I don’t know what this means for society, but it doesn’t feel great.