This is an interesting bit of data because it -is- just data and makes no judgement based on the data. It leaves the reader to decide if it's a good or bad thi

This is an interesting bit of data because it -is- just data and makes no judgement based on the data. It leaves the reader to decide if it's a good or bad thing. On the one hand scientists are not always good writers. Bring good at science does not imply good communication skills. Clearly tools like spell-checker and grammar-checker have been jn use for decades, is this not just the next iteration? On the other hand LLMs are just probability machines. So while the review might accurately reflect the authors opinion, it may come across as "bland". All the personality of the reviewer is stripped away. It's like fast-food. It's all the same. Which has up-sides. But it's considered "low quality" in part because it's "designed by focus group". By contrast Mamas Italian Kitchen reflects mamas unique personality. Perhaps they are both OK, in their own way.