REVIEW 4 cited by
Towards the relationship between AIGC in manuscript writing and author profiles: evidence from preprints in LLMs
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
read the original abstract
AIGC tools such as ChatGPT have profoundly changed scientific research, leading to widespread attention on its use on academic writing. Leveraging preprints from large language models, this study examined the use of AIGC in manuscript writing and its correlation with author profiles. We found that: (1) since the release of ChatGPT, the likelihood of abstracts being AI-generated has gradually increased; (2) scientists from English-speaking countries are less likely to use AIGC tools for writing assistance, while those from countries with linguistic differences from English are more likely to use these tools; (3) there is weak correlation between a paper's AI-generated probability and authors' academic performance; and (4) authors who have previously published papers with high AI-generated probabilities are more likely to continue using AIGC tools. We believe that this paper provides insightful results for relevant policies and norms and in enhancing the understanding of the relationship between humans and AI.
Forward citations
Cited by 4 Pith papers
-
Word Overuse and Alignment in Large Language Models: The Influence of Learning from Human Feedback
People prefer text containing the words that an instruction-tuned model uses far more than its base version, linking human feedback training to LLM word overuse.
-
Model Misalignment and Language Change: Traces of AI-Associated Language in Unscripted Spoken English
After ChatGPT's release, science and tech podcast speakers used AI-associated words like 'surpass' and 'align' more often, while control synonyms showed no average shift.
-
Exploring the Structure of AI-Induced Language Change in Scientific English
In PubMed abstracts, AI-associated 'spiking' words rise together with their synonyms rather than replacing them, and declining words show less systematic, more organic patterns.
-
Human-LLM Coevolution: Evidence from Academic Writing
After ChatGPT-style words were publicly flagged in early 2024, their frequency in arXiv abstracts dropped, while other common LLM-favored words kept rising, suggesting authors are adapting their writing to avoid detection.
Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.