人工智能生成的国际期刊英文评论文章摘要与学者撰写的摘要体裁对比分析

IF 3.1 1区 文学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
Xinwan Kong, Chengyu Liu
{"title":"人工智能生成的国际期刊英文评论文章摘要与学者撰写的摘要体裁对比分析","authors":"Xinwan Kong,&nbsp;Chengyu Liu","doi":"10.1016/j.jeap.2024.101432","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>There has been growing interest in the performance and efficiency of ChatGPT in generating academic texts. However, little empirical research has been conducted on its performance in producing review article abstracts. This study adopts the genre analysis approach to investigate the rhetorical moves of review article abstracts in hard and soft science disciplines based on two self-compiled corpora, respectively including 160 scholar-written abstracts from four high-impact international journals, and 160 abstracts generated by ChatGPT, with an aim to reveal the similarities and differences between human-written and AI-generated English review article abstracts. The results show significant differences between human-written and ChatGPT-generated abstracts, first in the frequency of three out of the five moves, and then in the sequential order of moves, with each type of abstracts demonstrating a preference for move sequence patterns as well as obligatory and optional elements. The two types of abstracts differ significantly in the frequency of move embedding, but share the same embedding combination patterns. These findings may deepen our understanding of ChatGPT's capabilities and limitations in generating academic texts across different disciplines, help improve the generative AI system, then highlight the complex relationship among the structure of academic abstracts, discipline cultures and genre knowledge.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":47717,"journal":{"name":"Journal of English for Academic Purposes","volume":"71 ","pages":"Article 101432"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A comparative genre analysis of AI-generated and scholar-written abstracts for English review articles in international journals\",\"authors\":\"Xinwan Kong,&nbsp;Chengyu Liu\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jeap.2024.101432\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>There has been growing interest in the performance and efficiency of ChatGPT in generating academic texts. However, little empirical research has been conducted on its performance in producing review article abstracts. This study adopts the genre analysis approach to investigate the rhetorical moves of review article abstracts in hard and soft science disciplines based on two self-compiled corpora, respectively including 160 scholar-written abstracts from four high-impact international journals, and 160 abstracts generated by ChatGPT, with an aim to reveal the similarities and differences between human-written and AI-generated English review article abstracts. The results show significant differences between human-written and ChatGPT-generated abstracts, first in the frequency of three out of the five moves, and then in the sequential order of moves, with each type of abstracts demonstrating a preference for move sequence patterns as well as obligatory and optional elements. The two types of abstracts differ significantly in the frequency of move embedding, but share the same embedding combination patterns. These findings may deepen our understanding of ChatGPT's capabilities and limitations in generating academic texts across different disciplines, help improve the generative AI system, then highlight the complex relationship among the structure of academic abstracts, discipline cultures and genre knowledge.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47717,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of English for Academic Purposes\",\"volume\":\"71 \",\"pages\":\"Article 101432\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of English for Academic Purposes\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1475158524001000\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"文学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of English for Academic Purposes","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1475158524001000","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

人们越来越关注 ChatGPT 在生成学术文本方面的性能和效率。然而,有关其在生成综述文章摘要方面的性能的实证研究却很少。本研究采用体裁分析方法,基于两个自编语料库(分别包括来自四种高影响力国际期刊的160篇学者撰写的摘要和由ChatGPT生成的160篇摘要),研究硬科学和软科学学科评论文章摘要的修辞手法,旨在揭示人类撰写的英文评论文章摘要与人工智能生成的英文评论文章摘要之间的异同。结果表明,人类撰写的摘要与 ChatGPT 生成的摘要之间存在明显差异,首先是在五招中三招的频率上,其次是在招式顺序上,两类摘要都表现出对招式顺序模式以及必选和可选元素的偏好。两类抽象在招式嵌入的频率上有显著差异,但在嵌入组合模式上却有相同之处。这些发现可以加深我们对 ChatGPT 生成不同学科学术文本的能力和局限性的理解,有助于改进生成式人工智能系统,进而凸显学术摘要结构、学科文化和体裁知识之间的复杂关系。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A comparative genre analysis of AI-generated and scholar-written abstracts for English review articles in international journals

There has been growing interest in the performance and efficiency of ChatGPT in generating academic texts. However, little empirical research has been conducted on its performance in producing review article abstracts. This study adopts the genre analysis approach to investigate the rhetorical moves of review article abstracts in hard and soft science disciplines based on two self-compiled corpora, respectively including 160 scholar-written abstracts from four high-impact international journals, and 160 abstracts generated by ChatGPT, with an aim to reveal the similarities and differences between human-written and AI-generated English review article abstracts. The results show significant differences between human-written and ChatGPT-generated abstracts, first in the frequency of three out of the five moves, and then in the sequential order of moves, with each type of abstracts demonstrating a preference for move sequence patterns as well as obligatory and optional elements. The two types of abstracts differ significantly in the frequency of move embedding, but share the same embedding combination patterns. These findings may deepen our understanding of ChatGPT's capabilities and limitations in generating academic texts across different disciplines, help improve the generative AI system, then highlight the complex relationship among the structure of academic abstracts, discipline cultures and genre knowledge.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.60
自引率
13.30%
发文量
81
审稿时长
57 days
期刊介绍: The Journal of English for Academic Purposes provides a forum for the dissemination of information and views which enables practitioners of and researchers in EAP to keep current with developments in their field and to contribute to its continued updating. JEAP publishes articles, book reviews, conference reports, and academic exchanges in the linguistic, sociolinguistic and psycholinguistic description of English as it occurs in the contexts of academic study and scholarly exchange itself.
×
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×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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