Yeah, this is a hot take: I think it’s totally fine if researchers who have done their studies and collected their data want to use AI as a language tool to bolster their paper. Some researchers legitimately have a hard time communicating, or English is a second language, and would benefit from a pass through AI enhancement, or as a translation tool if they’re more comfortable writing in their native language. However, I am not in favor of submitting it without review of every single word, or using it to synthesize new concepts / farm citations. That’s not research because anybody can do it.
Comment on [deleted]
JohnDClay@sh.itjust.works 1 month agoI don’t think it’s even a hot take
1stTime4MeInMCU@mander.xyz 1 month ago
kwomp2@sh.itjust.works 1 month ago
It is also a somehow hot take because it kinda puts the burden of systemic misconfiguration on individuals shoulders (oh hey we’ve seen this before, after and all the time, hashtag (neo)liberalism).
I agree people who did that fucked up. But having your existence as an academic, your job, maybe the only thing you’re good at rely on publishing a ton of papers no matter what should be taken into account.
This is a huge problem for science not just since LLM’s.
1stTime4MeInMCU@mander.xyz 1 month ago
Yeah, when you build the hoops you must jump through to maintain your livelihood to be based on a publication machine is it any surprise people gameify it and exploit what they can
SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world 1 month ago
It’s a hot take, but it’s also objectively the correct opinion
OpenStars@piefed.social 1 month ago
Unfortunately, the former is rather what should be the case, although so many times it is not:-(.