> But that's a reason you should expect it to stop working soon

I agree. (And it seems like it already stopped working, if I understood others here correctly.)

But again if I understood others here correctly, an academic paper like this would necessarily be studying models that are well behind the leading edge at time of publication. My argument is that the study authors shouldn't be faulted for investigating something that currently seems unlikely to work, because at the time of investigation it would have seemed much more likely to work.