Science

16039 readers

110 users here now

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

founded 6 years ago

MODERATORS

MinutePhrase@lemmy.ml

124

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

submitted 2 years ago by floofloof@lemmy.ca to c/science@lemmy.ml

44 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 2 years 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 2 years 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 2 years 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.