The scary part is the editors, copyeditors and the reviewers not catching this. If they’re not catching casual LLM wording, how are they to be counted on to make sure the science behind the paper is good and valid?
Comment on We're sorry.
FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 1 year ago
“was not detected by the authors…”… BULLSHIT.
The author was chatGPT. At least of that phrase. the claimed-author… used chatGPT. There’s zero justifiable excuse for the author to be totally unaware. they “wrote” it, after all.
Albbi@lemmy.ca 1 year ago
JoBo@feddit.uk 1 year ago
They do not include the peer reviewers in their list of people who missed it. Which means that either the peer reviewers did pick it up and for some reason it didn’t get addressed (unlikely) or this was a straight up pay-to-play and whoever runs that particular bit of the racket for Elsevier fucked up.
Hobbes_Dent@lemmy.world 1 year ago
…was inadvertently outsourced on fiver… and people would shit but half the world seems ok with this shit.
FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 1 year ago
so they just hired a shadow writer. And the shadow writer used chat GPT.
because that makes the excuse valid, right?
fossilesque@mander.xyz 1 year ago
My man, it’s literally a ChatGPT reply window. It’s a joke! :)
sin_free_for_00_days@sopuli.xyz 1 year ago
It wasn’t the authors. Well, not the authors of the paper. It was the author of the publisher’s introduction to the paper.
JoBo@feddit.uk 1 year ago
The publishers do not write any part of the paper.
Turun@feddit.de 1 year ago
No shit it’s bullshit. It’s a meme about AI text in a research paper that makes fun of Elsevier by having ChatGPT write an apology template for Elsevier.