As a scientist in academic research, I can only see this as a bad thing. The #1 valued thing in science is trust. At the end of the day (until things change in how we handle research data, code etc...) all papers are based on the reviewers trust in the authors that their data is what they say it is, and the code they submit does what it says it does.

Allowing an AI agent to automate code, data or analysis, necessitates that a human must thoroughly check it for errors. As anyone who has ever written code or a paper knows, this takes as long or longer than the initial creation itself, and only takes longer if you were not the one to write it.

Perhaps I am naive and missing something. I see the paper writing aspect as quite valuable as a draft system (as an assistive tool), but the code/data/analysis part I am heavily sceptical of.

Furthermore this seems like it will merely encourage academic spam, which already wastes valuable time for the volunteer (unpaid) reviewers, editors and chairs time.