Science

374 readers

1 users here now

Subscribe to see new publications and popular science coverage of current research on your homepage

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

MinutePhrase@lemmy.ml

Signs of undeclared ChatGPT use in papers mounting (retractionwatch.com)

submitted 1 year ago by floofloof@lemmy.ca to c/science@lemmy.ml

28 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] bane_killgrind@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

A research paper is not bulk work like a house. It's more like a watch, and a watchmaker using a screw gun is daft.

[–] PoisonedPrisonPanda@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Thats another point. Fair enough.

But still I dont think that science will stall just because of chatgpt.

Journalism? Will for sure. But scientific publications have a systemic problem (like publisher-polism, pubscores etc) And outsourcing writing work to chargpt is - in my opinion - non of them.

[–] bane_killgrind@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 year ago

Sure, but using bad tools to do things is going to get you worse results that using the right tools. If we define worse as "less volume" then sure GPT is fine.