{"title":"以概念为中心的综合矩阵框架(SMF)在科技写作中的应用:从偏执到危险的旅程?","authors":"Sushma Bommanavar, Vishnudas Prabhu","doi":"10.4103/jomfp.jomfp_270_24","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Amidst the new arrival of application of ChatGPT (Chat Generative Pre training Transformer) for scientific writing and in biomedical research projects, this AI powered chatbot is liable for \"<i>Artificial hallucinations</i>\" as the information provided by it, at times, does not relate to the real world scenario and needs continuous monitoring and re evaluation by human intervention. Though it has been mooted as a new panacea for students, researchers, and academicians to write credible scientific writing, the issue remains: \"<i>Is the information provided trustworthy</i>\"? Identifying this research gap, we intended to pen down a concept centric synthesis matrix framework (SMF) to identify the usages and perils of employing Chat GPT as a credible tool in the field of scientific writing in academics and research. Google Scholar and PubMed search databases were implemented with search strings using Boolean terms such as \"Chat GPT\", \"Scientific writing\", \"Chat GPT and scientific writing\", Chat GPT and Biomedical research\", \"Artificial hallucinations and Chat GPT\", \"Advantages and Chat GPT\", \"Disadvantages and Chat GPT\", \"Accuracy of Chat GPT and Scientific writing\". We sourced articles, chiefly full text, written in the English language. The review was further assessed by using three category rubrics applying specific parameters such as coverage, synthesis, and significance of included studies. This review highlighted inferences derived from evidence based studies in which Chat GPT has reported huge concerns related to plagiarism, ethics, bias, incorrect content, etc., when used in scientific writing platforms. Hence, it cannot be a reliable tool and needs supervision by human intervention. This review additionally emphasized the importance of applying the SMF as a guiding principle in the field of scientific writing and hence should be included as a modification in curriculum design by educationalists and policy reformers in higher education as a quality enhancement initiative in the discipline of research.</p>","PeriodicalId":38846,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Pathology","volume":"29 2","pages":"318-323"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12283038/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A concept-centric synthesis matrix framework (SMF) on application of Chat GPT in scientific writing: A journey from bigotry to Peril???\",\"authors\":\"Sushma Bommanavar, Vishnudas Prabhu\",\"doi\":\"10.4103/jomfp.jomfp_270_24\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Amidst the new arrival of application of ChatGPT (Chat Generative Pre training Transformer) for scientific writing and in biomedical research projects, this AI powered chatbot is liable for \\\"<i>Artificial hallucinations</i>\\\" as the information provided by it, at times, does not relate to the real world scenario and needs continuous monitoring and re evaluation by human intervention. Though it has been mooted as a new panacea for students, researchers, and academicians to write credible scientific writing, the issue remains: \\\"<i>Is the information provided trustworthy</i>\\\"? Identifying this research gap, we intended to pen down a concept centric synthesis matrix framework (SMF) to identify the usages and perils of employing Chat GPT as a credible tool in the field of scientific writing in academics and research. Google Scholar and PubMed search databases were implemented with search strings using Boolean terms such as \\\"Chat GPT\\\", \\\"Scientific writing\\\", \\\"Chat GPT and scientific writing\\\", Chat GPT and Biomedical research\\\", \\\"Artificial hallucinations and Chat GPT\\\", \\\"Advantages and Chat GPT\\\", \\\"Disadvantages and Chat GPT\\\", \\\"Accuracy of Chat GPT and Scientific writing\\\". We sourced articles, chiefly full text, written in the English language. The review was further assessed by using three category rubrics applying specific parameters such as coverage, synthesis, and significance of included studies. This review highlighted inferences derived from evidence based studies in which Chat GPT has reported huge concerns related to plagiarism, ethics, bias, incorrect content, etc., when used in scientific writing platforms. Hence, it cannot be a reliable tool and needs supervision by human intervention. This review additionally emphasized the importance of applying the SMF as a guiding principle in the field of scientific writing and hence should be included as a modification in curriculum design by educationalists and policy reformers in higher education as a quality enhancement initiative in the discipline of research.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":38846,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Pathology\",\"volume\":\"29 2\",\"pages\":\"318-323\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12283038/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Pathology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4103/jomfp.jomfp_270_24\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/6/30 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Pathology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/jomfp.jomfp_270_24","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/6/30 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
随着ChatGPT (Chat Generative Pre training Transformer)在科学写作和生物医学研究项目中的新应用,这款AI驱动的聊天机器人可能会出现“人工幻觉”,因为它提供的信息有时与现实世界的场景无关,需要人类干预的持续监测和重新评估。虽然它被认为是学生、研究人员和学者撰写可信科学文章的新灵丹妙药,但问题仍然存在:“提供的信息可信吗?”认识到这一研究差距,我们打算写下一个以概念为中心的综合矩阵框架(SMF),以确定将Chat GPT作为学术和研究科学写作领域的可靠工具的用法和危险。b谷歌Scholar和PubMed搜索数据库使用布尔术语实现搜索字符串,如“Chat GPT”、“科学写作”、“Chat GPT和科学写作”、“Chat GPT和生物医学研究”、“人工幻觉和Chat GPT”、“优点和Chat GPT”、“缺点和Chat GPT”、“Chat GPT和科学写作的准确性”。我们采购的文章,主要是全文,用英语写的。采用三种分类标准对纳入研究的具体参数(如覆盖范围、综合和重要性)进行进一步评价。这篇综述强调了从基于证据的研究中得出的推论,在这些研究中,Chat GPT报告了在科学写作平台中使用时与剽窃、伦理、偏见、不正确内容等相关的巨大担忧。因此,它不是一个可靠的工具,需要人为干预的监督。这篇综述还强调了将SMF作为科学写作领域的指导原则的重要性,因此应该被教育学家和高等教育政策改革者作为提高研究学科质量的举措,纳入课程设计的修改。
A concept-centric synthesis matrix framework (SMF) on application of Chat GPT in scientific writing: A journey from bigotry to Peril???
Amidst the new arrival of application of ChatGPT (Chat Generative Pre training Transformer) for scientific writing and in biomedical research projects, this AI powered chatbot is liable for "Artificial hallucinations" as the information provided by it, at times, does not relate to the real world scenario and needs continuous monitoring and re evaluation by human intervention. Though it has been mooted as a new panacea for students, researchers, and academicians to write credible scientific writing, the issue remains: "Is the information provided trustworthy"? Identifying this research gap, we intended to pen down a concept centric synthesis matrix framework (SMF) to identify the usages and perils of employing Chat GPT as a credible tool in the field of scientific writing in academics and research. Google Scholar and PubMed search databases were implemented with search strings using Boolean terms such as "Chat GPT", "Scientific writing", "Chat GPT and scientific writing", Chat GPT and Biomedical research", "Artificial hallucinations and Chat GPT", "Advantages and Chat GPT", "Disadvantages and Chat GPT", "Accuracy of Chat GPT and Scientific writing". We sourced articles, chiefly full text, written in the English language. The review was further assessed by using three category rubrics applying specific parameters such as coverage, synthesis, and significance of included studies. This review highlighted inferences derived from evidence based studies in which Chat GPT has reported huge concerns related to plagiarism, ethics, bias, incorrect content, etc., when used in scientific writing platforms. Hence, it cannot be a reliable tool and needs supervision by human intervention. This review additionally emphasized the importance of applying the SMF as a guiding principle in the field of scientific writing and hence should be included as a modification in curriculum design by educationalists and policy reformers in higher education as a quality enhancement initiative in the discipline of research.
期刊介绍:
The journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Pathology [ISSN:print-(0973-029X, online-1998-393X)] is a tri-annual journal published on behalf of “The Indian Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Pathologists” (IAOMP). The publication of JOMFP was started in the year 1993. The journal publishes papers on a wide spectrum of topics associated with the scope of Oral and Maxillofacial Pathology, also, ensuring scientific merit and quality. It is a comprehensive reading material for the professionals who want to upgrade their diagnostic skills in Oral Diseases; allows exposure to newer topics and methods of research in the Oral-facial Tissues and Pathology. New features allow an open minded thinking and approach to various pathologies. It also encourages authors to showcase quality work done by them and to compile relevant cases which are diagnostically challenging. The Journal takes pride in maintaining the quality of articles and photomicrographs.