Simkhada, B., van Teijlingen, A., Simkhada, P. and van Teijlingen, E., 2024. ChatGPT: Challenges to editors and examiners. Health Prospect: Journal of Public Health, 23 (1), 21-24.
Full text available as:
|
PDF
AI paper Simkhada vanTeijlingen Simkhada van Teijlingen 2024.pdf - Published Version Available under License Creative Commons Attribution. 73kB | |
Copyright to original material in this document is with the original owner(s). Access to this content through BURO is granted on condition that you use it only for research, scholarly or other non-commercial purposes. If you wish to use it for any other purposes, you must contact BU via BURO@bournemouth.ac.uk. Any third party copyright material in this document remains the property of its respective owner(s). BU grants no licence for further use of that third party material. |
Official URL: https://www.nepjol.info/index.php/HPROSPECT/articl...
DOI: 10.3126/hprospect.v23i1.60819
Abstract
The past year saw an exponential growth in the use of machine learning using AI (artificial intelligence) and particularly Generative AI (GenAI) such as ChatGPT. The latter has seen a spectacular rise in the public debate and in the mass media. Those not involved in the development of AI were amazed by the capabilities of ChatGPT to produce text equal to the average human produced texts. There is no doubt that the adoption of AI is advancing rapidly. To test the ability of ChatGPT in its free version, we posed simple questions about the topic we had previously published. After reading the short essay produced by ChatGPT we repeated the question whilst asking for references to be included. We were surprised by the quality of this very general piece of work. In many UK universities there is a debate starting about students’ use of ChatGPT, and how difficult it is to distinguish between work produced by the average student and that produced by AI. There is a similar problem for editors and reviewers of academic journals. It really boils down to the question: 'How can you be certain the submitted manuscript came from a human source?’ However, we feel the progress of AI is not all doom and gloom. We outline some of the key problems around AI and academic publishing, but also opportunities arising from the use of AI in this area.
Item Type: | Article |
---|---|
ISSN: | 2091-2021 |
Uncontrolled Keywords: | AI; Artificial; ChatGBT; Publishing; cheat |
Group: | Faculty of Health & Social Sciences |
ID Code: | 39885 |
Deposited By: | Symplectic RT2 |
Deposited On: | 29 May 2024 14:41 |
Last Modified: | 29 May 2024 14:41 |
Downloads
Downloads per month over past year
Repository Staff Only - |