The Chinese journal of artificial intelligence最新文献

筛选
英文 中文
Scientific Writing – ChatGPT Versus Real-time Output: Addressing Academician’s Concern 科学写作 - ChatGPT 与实时输出:解决院士关注的问题
The Chinese journal of artificial intelligence Pub Date : 2024-01-26 DOI: 10.2174/0129503752269069231213045450
F. Anwar, Salman Bakr I. Hosawi, Fahad A. Al-Abbasi, T. Asar
{"title":"Scientific Writing – ChatGPT Versus Real-time Output: Addressing Academician’s Concern","authors":"F. Anwar, Salman Bakr I. Hosawi, Fahad A. Al-Abbasi, T. Asar","doi":"10.2174/0129503752269069231213045450","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2174/0129503752269069231213045450","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000\u0000The advent of ChatGPT, an artificial intelligence (AI) model, has introduced\u0000new challenges in educational practices, particularly in the realm of scientific writing at higher\u0000educational institutions. The AI is trained on extensive datasets to generate scientific texts. Many\u0000professors and academicians express concerns about the inclusion of AI chatbots in project execution,\u0000interpretation, and writing within specialized subject curricula at the undergraduate and master’s\u0000levels.\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000To address these concerns, we employed the ChatGPT tool by posing a specific query\u0000“Gynecomastia and the risk of non-specific lung disease, along with associated risk factors for workers\u0000in the petrochemical industry”. We conducted a comparison between responses generated by\u0000ChatGPT and real-time output from master’s students, examining document-to-document variation\u0000on different dates.\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000The AI chatbot failed to identify potential risk factors, in contrast to the\u0000student response, which highlighted alteration in neutrophil levels, lung architecture, high IgE, elevated\u0000CO2 levels, etc. The two responses did not align in terms of context understanding, language\u0000nuances (words and phrases), and knowledge limitations (real-time access to information, creativity,\u0000and originality of the query). A plagiarism check using the iThenticate software reported similarity\u0000indices of 11% and 14%, respectively, in document-to-document analyses. The concerns raised by\u0000academicians are not unfounded, and the apprehension regarding students utilizing ChatGPT in the\u0000future revolves around ethical considerations, the potential for plagiarism, and the absence of laws\u0000governing the use of AI in medical or scientific writing.\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000While AI integration in the curriculum is feasible, it should be approached with a clear\u0000acknowledgement of its limitations and benefits. Emphasizing the importance of critical thinking and\u0000original work is crucial for students engaging with AI tools, addressing concerns related to ethics,\u0000plagiarism, and potential copyright infringement in medical or scientific writings.\u0000","PeriodicalId":489496,"journal":{"name":"The Chinese journal of artificial intelligence","volume":"83 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-01-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140494325","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
相关产品
×
本文献相关产品
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信