Rethinking plagiarism in the wake of chatGPT has become increasingly important. With chatGPT, it is now possible to generate text that is indistinguishable from human-written content. This has raised questions about the ethical implications of using chatGPT-generated content, and how to ensure that plagiarism is avoided. It is important to consider the potential for plagiarism when using chatGPT, and to develop strategies to ensure that original content is created and used. Additionally, it is important to consider the implications of using chatGPT-generated content for copyright law and intellectual property rights.
When artificial intelligence has made it easier to write scientific manuscripts, even to the extent that we can give the initial idea to AI and it will write the rest of the article, this poses a challenge to editors to determine whether the article was written by a machine or a human. In my opinion, companies like Open AI should record a digital signature after each scientific writing and provide it to academic institutions. What is your opinion on this and how should it be implemented?
Personally, I don't see the harm in using ChatGPT to write an Introduction or a paragraph. For scientific papers, the important things are the ideas and the results. A lot of brilliant researchers fail to publish their work in high-quality journals due to their poor English (lack of funding to benefit from professional proof editing and reading), so using ChatGPT could help them share their works in prestigious journals. What is unacceptable is the plagiarism of ideas.
Abdessamad Benlahbib What about producing data and future high-quality articles using AI?
Actually the statement that chatGPT generates text indistinguishable from human-written content is wrong.
Text consists of three, independent, elements: Grammar, syntax and meaning. The first two can be and have been automated.
Where chatGPT enters the picture is in the third, since, by construction, it's possible to have any computer construct text that's grammatically and syntactically correct. What chatGPT does is use a search engine to poll for meaning. Which hits the obstacle that what is right and wrong in science isn't subject to a majority vote-social trends are.
What chatGPT does is realize a next step in automation, forcing human beings to focus on issues that are relevant to humans.
Of course if humans believe that technical content and its social impact are equivalent, they make themselves redundant. So if a human uses chatGPT ``too much'', the question arises, why employ that person at all. It's always a good idea to get rid of middlemen...
So what programs like chatGPT lead to is requiring evidence that the text, indeed, was a human creation and not ``boilerplate''. On the other hand, there aren't that many different ways of stating ``I study the solution of the Dirac equation'', for instance...
Here is what ChatGPT responds with to my prompt "What are the best methods to find out whether a text has been created by a human or by ChatGPT?".
There are several methods that can be used to determine whether a text has been created by a human or by ChatGPT. Here are some of the most common methods:
Overall, these methods can be used in combination to determine whether a text has been created by a human or by ChatGPT. However, it's important to note that ChatGPT is constantly improving and may eventually produce text that is indistinguishable from human writing.
We need probably to also "rethink" the intellectual property and code licences. Also, we need teach ethics and moral future researchers, so they can say that something is generated by AI or it is not.
But, another problem is that almost all of the AI systems are proprietary software. This means that we cannot even see how text (in the case of GPT) is produced. We need more openness, more transparency and decentralization in these fields.
Mohammad Anvar Adibhesami We live in a time when we lack
creativity, but we have no miracle recipe for advancing
humanity, other than combining art with science.
https://www.academia.edu/88466623/Association_of_art_and_science
Here is the text generated by chatGPT to reply to your concern :-)
The concerns about plagiarism in the wake of chatGPT are valid, as the technology has made it possible to generate text that is difficult to distinguish from human-written content. I agree that it is important to consider the ethical implications of using chatGPT-generated content and to develop strategies to ensure that original content is created and used.
In terms of the specific suggestion to record a digital signature after each scientific writing and provide it to academic institutions, this could be a useful approach to help identify whether an article was written by a machine or a human. However, it is important to note that this approach would only work if the digital signature is unique and cannot be replicated by others. Additionally, it would need to be widely adopted and recognized by academic institutions in order to be effective.
Another potential approach could be to develop tools that can detect whether a piece of text has been generated by a machine or written by a human. This would require significant technological advancements, but it could provide a more scalable solution to the problem of identifying machine-generated content.
Overall, it is important for companies like OpenAI to be proactive in addressing these concerns and working with academic institutions and other stakeholders to develop solutions that can help ensure the integrity of scientific writing and avoid plagiarism.
Bernard Raust they are for-profit companies, they have no
interest in cooperating to clean up the situation, the only
initiative is to create collective actions
https://www.academia.edu/89399367/R%C3%A9seaux_de_connaissance
Dear researchers,
Please refer to a recent published paper on ChatGPT and Learning Motivation
Article Impact of ChatGPT on Learning Motivation: Teachers and Stude...
All my best!
One of the solution will be:
- non-profit companies give free access to chatGPT
- profit companies (same one) have ability to check if it is an AI generated text ... because they know how they have generated this text
That's a new business model and I am it is already under development !
AI makes plagiarism harder to detect, argue academics – in paper written by chatbot
Lecturers say programs capable of writing competent student coursework threaten academic integrity...
An academic paper entitled Chatting and Cheating: Ensuring Academic Integrity in the Era of ChatGPT was published this month in an education journal, describing how artificial intelligence (AI) tools “raise a number of challenges and concerns, particularly in relation to academic honesty and plagiarism”.
What readers – and indeed the peer reviewers who cleared it for publication – did not know was that the paper itself had been written by the controversial AI chatbot ChatGPT.
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2023/mar/19/ai-makes-plagiarism-harder-to-detect-argue-academics-in-paper-written-by-chatbot
Dear Ljubomir Jacić The confrontation between human intelligence
and artificial intelligence must strengthen the architecture of
information systems by adding new standards such as SPDF which
unfortunately has not been acclaimed at the international level.
https://www.academia.edu/44725919/EVOLUTION_ARCHITECTURALE
_Architectural_Evolution
A survey of 125 university librarians across the United States has discovered wildly differing opinions on the use and morality of artificial intelligence (AI) tools such as ChatGPT in higher education...
Encouragingly, half of surveyed librarians do not believe that students who use AI products are cheating, against 8% who believe that they are. And some 86% of librarians said AI use by professors for research is ethical or ‘somewhat’ ethical, while 12% believe it is unethical...
Looking into the ethics of AI use, the report said that 8% of librarians stated a definitive ‘yes’ when asked if they believe it is cheating if students use AI products for research, while 42% felt this to be somewhat true.
The ‘somewhat’ answer appeared to be related to context – some uses would be ethically problematic, such as passing ChatGPT work off as their own, while a student using AI to generate results that they interpret would not be an issue...
https://www.universityworldnews.com/post.php?story=20230316140401598
Mohammad Anvar Adibhesami ... Mohammad, Re: "Rethinking plagiarism in the wake of chatGPT" Your question is appropriate and extremely important. However its 2 years too late. And asks us to behave morally.- My opinion; it no longer matters what we think, what morals, rules, restrictions or even laws we impose on the use of this tool. - To be blunt, the "cats-out-of-the-bag". Even if globally we decide to pause or turn it off the concept is easily re-created. Its evolution since April 2022 is unprecedented. And that should dramatically increase next month (or so) as we go from GTP 4 to 5.
Comparing scientific abstracts generated by ChatGPT to original abstracts using an artificial intelligence output detector, plagiarism detector, and blinded human reviewers
ChatGPT writes believable scientific abstracts, though with completely generated data. These are original without any plagiarism detected but are often identifiable using an AI output detector and skeptical human reviewers. Abstract evaluation for journals and conferences must adapt policy and practice to maintain rigorous scientific standards; we suggest inclusion of AI output detectors in the editorial process and clear disclosure if these technologies are used. The boundaries of ethical and acceptable use of large language models to help scientific writing remain to be determined...
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2022.12.23.521610v1
I recommend to read this manuscript.
ChatGPT in Academic Writing and Publishing: A Comprehensive Guide
Scientific writing is a difficult task that requires clarity, precision, and rigour. It also involves a large amount of research, analysis, and synthesis of information from various sources. However, scientific writing is also hard, time-consuming, and susceptible to errors. Advanced artificial intelligence (AI) models, such as ChatGPT, can simplify academic writing and publishing. ChatGPT has many applications and uses in academic and scientific writing and publishing such as hypothesis generation, literature review, safety recommendations, troubleshooting, tips, paraphrasing and summarising, editing, and proofreading, journal selection, journal style formatting, and other applications.
In this book chapter, we will discuss the main advantages, examples, and applications of ChatGPT in academic and scientific writing from research conception to publishing.
Read online.
https://achtago.com/publications/list/chatgpt-in-academic-writing-and-publishing/
Download full text
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/369817340_Chapter_2_ChatGPT_in_Academic_Writing_and_Publishing_A_Comprehensive_Guide
Mohammad Anvar Adibhesami The only solution is to standardize ChatGPT otherwise it will turnout to commercial purpose and this will slowdown research and getting new tools. The following publication is an attempt to promote open standards in the field of
Software Architecture,
Interoperability (E-learning),
XML data interoperability,
Semantic Interoperability,
Virtual Learning
https://www.academia.edu/44725919/EVOLUTION_ARCHITECTURALE_Architectural_Evolution
One of the primary concerns with using ChatGPT for editing research work is the risk of plagiarism.
Plagiarism is a significant concern in academic research and can have severe consequences for the researcher and their reputation. The risk of unintentional plagiarism increases when relying solely on automated systems such as ChatGPT.
ChatGPT may suggest phrases or sentences that are too similar to existing works, thereby introducing the risk of plagiarism. Despite being trained on vast amounts of data, it may not be able to distinguish between original ideas and those that have already been published. As a result, it may inadvertently suggest phrases or sentences that are too similar to existing works, leading to accidental plagiarism...
https://www.enago.com/academy/negative-costs-of-using-chatgpt-to-edit-research-manuscript/
“If an original work and a secondary use share the same or highly similar purposes, and the secondary use is of a commercial nature, the first factor is likely to weigh against fair use, absent some other justification for copying.”
https://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2023/06/06/the-supreme-court-case-of-andy-warhol-foundation-v-goldsmith-what-if-anything-does-it-mean-to-artificial-intelligence/?informz=1&nbd=6f03e560-5431-4744-8998-e00223ee7a82&nbd_source=informz
ChatGPT-generated scientific papers could be picked up by new AI-detection tool, say researchers
A tool that could distinguish with accuracy whether ChatGPT produced submissions could potentially be a useful addition to our rigorous peer review processes if it had a proven track record of accurate detection...
Professor Desaire and colleagues reported they have developed a highly accurate method of detecting ChatGPT-generated writing in scientific texts.
Professor Desaire said it could help journal editors who find themselves deluged by material written with the help of the chatbot.
A detector might help editors prioritise what articles they send out for review, she said...
https://www.abc.net.au/news/science/2023-06-08/chatgpt-generated-scientific-papers-new-ai-dectection-tool/102449210
Complete reliance on AI, such as DeepL Write and ChatGPT, for research and scholarly editing is not feasible or advisable.
When editing your scholarly work, the choice among DeepL Write, ChatGPT, and human editors can greatly impact your academic reputation...
DeepL Write and ChatGPT can support several tasks by providing initial suggestions and automating certain processes; however, human editors remain indispensable for ensuring accuracy, critical thinking, ethical standards, and meaningful engagement...
https://www.enago.com/academy/limitations-of-deepl-write-chatgpt-editing/
Generative AI models have revolutionized the way we interact with technology for research and scholarly writing. As these AI systems become increasingly sophisticated in generating human-like text, questions arise about their ethical boundaries, particularly in the area of scientific writing. However, the responsible use of generative AI in scholarly writing depends on establishing clear guidelines, protocols, and frameworks that ensure compliance of these ethical boundaries set to maintain research integrity.
Integrating generative AI assistance into the scientific writing process should be guided by a commitment to transparency, integrity, and accuracy. Therefore, institutions, journals, and researchers must collectively address the intricacies of authorship, citation, and accountability in the age of AI-generated content. This article explores the ethical considerations surrounding the use of generative AI in scientific writing and the importance of striking the right balance to ensure its responsible use...
https://www.enago.com/academy/generative-ai-ethics-in-academic-writing/
Copyright holder may have no control over websites where its content is held. This is especially true where content is posted in violation of copyright or under a copyright exception.
There is certainly enough copyrightable material available under license to build reliable, workable, and trustworthy AI. Just because a developer wants to use “everything” does not mean it needs to do so, is entitled to do so, or has the right to do so. Nor should governments and courts twist or modify the law to accommodate them...
https://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2023/11/28/the-united-states-copyright-office-notice-of-inquiring-on-ai-a-quick-take/?informz=1&nbd=6f03e560-5431-4744-8998-e00223ee7a82&nbd_source=informz
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Biological Science
- Bioecology
- Systems Ecology
- Landscape Ecology
- Connectivity