Almost Nobody Is Using ChatGPT to Write Academic Science Papers (Yet).

IF 4.4 Q2 COMPUTER SCIENCE, ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE

Big Data and Cognitive Computing Pub Date : 2024-10-01 Epub Date: 2024-10-11 DOI:10.3390/bdcc8100133

Heather Desaire, Madeline Isom, David Hua

{"title":"Almost Nobody Is Using ChatGPT to Write Academic Science Papers (Yet).","authors":"Heather Desaire, Madeline Isom, David Hua","doi":"10.3390/bdcc8100133","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>We assessed 19,000 scientific introductions to measure the level of undisclosed use of ChatGPT in scientific papers published in 2023 and early 2024. We applied a \"stylistics\" approach that has previously been shown to be effective at differentiating AI-generated text from human-written text in a variety of venues. Ten different MDPI journals were selected for this study, and the rate of use of undisclosed AI writing in these journals was fairly consistent across the journals. We estimate that ChatGPT was used for writing or significant editing in about 1 to 3% of the introductions tested. This analysis is the first systematic study of detecting undisclosed ChatGPT in published manuscripts in cases where obvious indicators, such as phrases like \"regenerate response\", are not present. The work demonstrates that generative AI is not polluting mainstream journals to any appreciable extent and that the overwhelming majority of scientists remain hesitant to embrace this tool for late-stage writing and editing.</p>","PeriodicalId":36397,"journal":{"name":"Big Data and Cognitive Computing","volume":"8 10","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12382442/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Big Data and Cognitive Computing","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/bdcc8100133","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/10/11 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"COMPUTER SCIENCE, ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

We assessed 19,000 scientific introductions to measure the level of undisclosed use of ChatGPT in scientific papers published in 2023 and early 2024. We applied a "stylistics" approach that has previously been shown to be effective at differentiating AI-generated text from human-written text in a variety of venues. Ten different MDPI journals were selected for this study, and the rate of use of undisclosed AI writing in these journals was fairly consistent across the journals. We estimate that ChatGPT was used for writing or significant editing in about 1 to 3% of the introductions tested. This analysis is the first systematic study of detecting undisclosed ChatGPT in published manuscripts in cases where obvious indicators, such as phrases like "regenerate response", are not present. The work demonstrates that generative AI is not polluting mainstream journals to any appreciable extent and that the overwhelming majority of scientists remain hesitant to embrace this tool for late-stage writing and editing.

查看原文本刊更多论文

几乎没有人使用ChatGPT来写学术科学论文（目前）。

我们评估了19,000篇科学介绍，以衡量2023年和2024年初发表的科学论文中未公开使用ChatGPT的水平。我们采用了一种“文体学”方法，这种方法在区分人工智能生成的文本和各种场合的人工编写的文本方面非常有效。本研究选择了10种不同的MDPI期刊，这些期刊中未公开的AI写作的使用率在期刊中是相当一致的。我们估计ChatGPT被用于编写或重要的编辑大约1%到3%的介绍测试。这项分析是第一次系统地研究在未出现明显指标（如“再生反应”等短语）的情况下，在已发表的手稿中检测未公开的ChatGPT。这项研究表明，生成式人工智能并没有在很大程度上污染主流期刊，而且绝大多数科学家仍然不愿将这一工具用于后期写作和编辑。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊