Dies ist eine Übersichtsseite mit Metadaten zu dieser wissenschaftlichen Arbeit. Der vollständige Artikel ist beim Verlag verfügbar.
Artificial intelligence as author: Can scientific reviewers recognize GPT-4o-generated manuscripts?
1
Zitationen
7
Autoren
2025
Jahr
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Chat Generative Pre-Trained Transformer (ChatGPT) is a natural language processing model. It can be argued that ChatGPT has recently begun to assume the role of a technological assistant capable of supporting academics in the process of scientific writing. ChatGPT may contribute to the spread of incorrect or incomplete information within academic literature, leading to conceptual confusion and potential academic misconduct. The aim of this study is to determine whether a scientific article entirely generated by an AI application such as ChatGPT can be detected by an academic journal editor or peer reviewer. METHODS: This study was conducted between November 1, 2024, and December 1, 2024. GPT-4o, was utilized in this study. ChatGPT was instructed to write a scientific article focused on predicting mortality and return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) in OHCA cases. The manuscript written by ChatGPT-4o was sent to 14 different reviewers who had previously served as reviewers or editors. The reviewers were asked to evaluate the manuscript as if they were an SCI-E journal editor or peer reviewer. The reviewers were informed that the article had been written by ChatGPT and were asked whether they had identified this during their review. RESULTS: Among the reviewers, 42.9 % (n = 6) decided to reject the manuscript at the editorial stage, whereas another 42.9 % (n = 6) opted to forward it to a peer reviewer. During the peer review stage, 42.9 % (n = 6) of the reviewers recommended rejection, while 28.6 % (n = 4) suggested major revisions. 78.6 % (n = 11) of the reviewers did not realize that the manuscript had been generated by an artificial intelligence model. CONCLUSION: The findings of our study highlight the necessity for journal editors and peer reviewers to be well-informed about ChatGPT and to develop systems capable of identifying whether a manuscript has been written by a human or generated by artificial intelligence.
Ähnliche Arbeiten
Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI): Concepts, taxonomies, opportunities and challenges toward responsible AI
2019 · 8.740 Zit.
Stop explaining black box machine learning models for high stakes decisions and use interpretable models instead
2019 · 8.649 Zit.
High-performance medicine: the convergence of human and artificial intelligence
2018 · 8.202 Zit.
BioBERT: a pre-trained biomedical language representation model for biomedical text mining
2019 · 6.886 Zit.
Proceedings of the 19th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence
2005 · 5.781 Zit.