Baijiao originated from the Temple of Concave Fei
Qubits | Official account QbitAI
Embarrassed, the physics paper copied the ChatGPT button as well.
The results not only passed two months of peer review, but were even finally published in the journal.
The one who discovered this phenomenon was Guillaume Cabanac, an associate professor at the University of Toulouse in France, who was selected as one of Nature's top ten people of the year.
Nature's latest report says this is not an isolated case, or even just the tip of the iceberg.
To say that the appearance of "Regenerate response" in the paper is relatively obscure, and there is more outrageous and obvious.
For example, directly copy "as an artificial intelligence language model, I..."
Well... That is to say, you can use it if you want, but it is a little too casual and not serious, and writing a paper is like a student's homework.
Just the tip of the iceberg
A few days ago, the journal Physica Scripta published a paper aimed at discovering new solutions to complex mathematical equations.
Unexpectedly, on the third page of the paper, a phrase similar to the ChatGPT button appeared "Regenerate Response".
The publisher's head of peer review and integrity said the authors later confirmed to the journal that they used ChatGPT to help draft the manuscript.
Prior to this, no such anomalies were found in the submission of the paper in May, the submission of the revised version in July, and subsequent typesetting.
The publisher has decided to retract the paper on the grounds that the authors submitted it without declaring that they were using the tool, which violated their ethical policy.
In fact, this is not the only case. Since pubpeer's incomplete statistics, there have been more than a dozen articles containing "Regenerate Response" or "As an AI language model, I..." in the past 4 months.
In the case of "As an AI language model, I ..." there are 8 results, the latest of which was found three days ago.
This also poses a tougher test for peer reviewers, who often do not have time to thoroughly check; Second, the number of visitors can't keep up.
However, there are also some specific methods, such as ChatGPT and other large models will be good at spitting out false literature,
Retraction Watch once broke a preprint of a millipede written by AI, which was retracted for containing false citations and was later relaunched.
Yes, declare it
In fact, this doesn't mean that researchers can't use ChatGPT and other big modeling tools to help write manuscripts.
Many publishers, including Elsevier and Springer Nature, have said:
Yes, declare it.
Previously, Som Biswas, a radiologist from the University of Tennessee Health Science Center, wrote 16 papers using ChatGPT in 4 months and published 5 papers in 4 different journals.
When he first submitted his paper, he confessed to his editor: Everything you see is written by AI.
As a result, just days later, the paper passed peer review and was published in the journal Radiology.
So after that, he got out of control, and his papers were not limited to radiology, including education, agriculture, law, etc.
For some people, the large model represented by ChatGPT has really improved their production efficiency.
What do you think about ChatGPT-assisted essay writing? Have you used it again to write papers?
Reference Links:
[1]https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-023-02477-w#ref-CR1
[2]https://pubpeer.com/search?q=%22As+an+AI+language+model%2C+I%22
[3]https://pubpeer.com/publications/DF3D58918B5A0BD5943E6D280ED7E2
— End —
Qubits QbitAI · Headline number signed
Follow us and be the first to know the latest scientific and technological trends