That is true in principle. But as scientific papers, this is supposed to be extremely precise, highly iterated, and thoroughly reviewed content. If there are v

That is true in principle. But as scientific papers, this is supposed to be extremely precise, highly iterated, and thoroughly reviewed content. If there are very obvious mistakes like a leftover pasted in button text, it calls into question whether the authors (or reviewers) were responsibly verifying the content contributed by a tool that is known to sometimes deliver wildly but subtly incorrect results, and thus the quality of the paper content as a whole.