Abstract
We assessed 19,000 scientific introductions to measure the level of undisclosed use of ChatGPT in scientific papers published in 2023 and early 2024. We applied a “stylistics” approach that has previously been shown to be effective at differentiating AI-generated text from human-written text in a variety of venues. Ten different MDPI journals were selected for this study, and the rate of use of undisclosed AI writing in these journals was fairly consistent across the journals. We estimate that ChatGPT was used for writing or significant editing in about 1 to 3% of the introductions tested. This analysis is the first systematic study of detecting undisclosed ChatGPT in published manuscripts in cases where obvious indicators, such as phrases like “regenerate response”, are not present. The work demonstrates that generative AI is not polluting mainstream journals to any appreciable extent and that the overwhelming majority of scientists remain hesitant to embrace this tool for late-stage writing and editing.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
