3 ms·

deleted (I made a mistake when switching from the linked French Scholar to English version, I posted incorrect information here)

aredox 3y ago
Exactly. A correct analysis would be to determine the baseline pre-chatGPT, examine if there is a trend (some language "clichés" evolve with time) and then check if there is a clear shift post-ChatGPT.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
gillesjacobs 3y ago
Yes exactly the whole claim is fundamentally flawed. Better queries would include proper timeframing and all LLM-preference-tuning phrases from https://github.com/AlpinDale/gptslop https://github.com/AlpinDale/gptslop But even then, I don't think this is the gotcha OP thinks it is: LLM generation and summarizing is a legit tool in the paper writing process, especially for conclusions. In my academic experience, the paper introduction and conclusion is often written last-minute, close to the submission deadline. While a good intro and conclusion are important for the reader, very little time is made available for it since researchers spend maximal time on expanding material findings and experiments. No wonder that assistive writing tools are used to speed things up. As long as proper post-editing and proof-reading is applied.
- semanticist 3y ago
  > As long as proper post-editing and proof-reading is applied for course. The whole point of the original article is that people aren't doing even that. Plus in an academic context, it's important to acknowledge when parts of the paper are not your own work, especially in cases where the generated summary may not accurately reflect the actual paper. Saying that ChatGPT has been used to generate summaries would allow people to judge if the summary alone can be trusted to represent the content of the paper.
Jabbles 3y ago
The link in the post is https://scholar.google.fr/scholar?hl=fr&as_sdt=0%2C5&as_ylo=2023&q=%22certainly%2C+here+is%22+-chatgpt+-llm&oq=%22certainly+here+is%22+-chatgpt+-llm https://scholar.google.fr/scholar?hl=fr&as_sdt=0%2C5&as_ylo=... Which already filters after 2023.
- baobabKoodaa 3y ago
  Sorry, I made a mistake when I tried to switch from French Scholar to English

aredox 3y ago

Exactly. A correct analysis would be to determine the baseline pre-chatGPT, examine if there is a trend (some language "clichés" evolve with time) and then check if there is a clear shift post-ChatGPT.

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

gillesjacobs 3y ago

Yes exactly the whole claim is fundamentally flawed. Better queries would include proper timeframing and all LLM-preference-tuning phrases from https://github.com/AlpinDale/gptslop https://github.com/AlpinDale/gptslop But even then, I don't think this is the gotcha OP thinks it is: LLM generation and summarizing is a legit tool in the paper writing process, especially for conclusions. In my academic experience, the paper introduction and conclusion is often written last-minute, close to the submission deadline. While a good intro and conclusion are important for the reader, very little time is made available for it since researchers spend maximal time on expanding material findings and experiments. No wonder that assistive writing tools are used to speed things up. As long as proper post-editing and proof-reading is applied.

semanticist 3y ago
> As long as proper post-editing and proof-reading is applied for course. The whole point of the original article is that people aren't doing even that. Plus in an academic context, it's important to acknowledge when parts of the paper are not your own work, especially in cases where the generated summary may not accurately reflect the actual paper. Saying that ChatGPT has been used to generate summaries would allow people to judge if the summary alone can be trusted to represent the content of the paper.

Jabbles 3y ago

The link in the post is https://scholar.google.fr/scholar?hl=fr&as_sdt=0%2C5&as_ylo=2023&q=%22certainly%2C+here+is%22+-chatgpt+-llm&oq=%22certainly+here+is%22+-chatgpt+-llm https://scholar.google.fr/scholar?hl=fr&as_sdt=0%2C5&as_ylo=... Which already filters after 2023.

baobabKoodaa 3y ago
Sorry, I made a mistake when I tried to switch from French Scholar to English