ChatGPT难题:人工智能文本检测工具错误地将人类生成的科学手稿识别为人工智能创作

Hooman H. Rashidi , Brandon D. Fennell , Samer Albahra , Bo Hu , Tom Gorbett
{"title":"ChatGPT难题:人工智能文本检测工具错误地将人类生成的科学手稿识别为人工智能创作","authors":"Hooman H. Rashidi ,&nbsp;Brandon D. Fennell ,&nbsp;Samer Albahra ,&nbsp;Bo Hu ,&nbsp;Tom Gorbett","doi":"10.1016/j.jpi.2023.100342","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>AI Chat Bots such as ChatGPT are revolutionizing our AI capabilities, especially in text generation, to help expedite many tasks, but they introduce new dilemmas. The detection of AI-generated text has become a subject of great debate considering the AI text detector’s known and unexpected limitations. Thus far, much research in this area has focused on the detection of AI-generated text; however, the goal of this study was to evaluate the opposite scenario, an AI-text detection tool's ability to discriminate human-generated text. Thousands of abstracts from several of the most well-known scientific journals were used to test the predictive capabilities of these detection tools, assessing abstracts from 1980 to 2023. We found that the AI text detector erroneously identified up to 8% of the known real abstracts as AI-generated text. This further highlights the current limitations of such detection tools and argues for novel detectors or combined approaches that can address this shortcoming and minimize its unanticipated consequences as we navigate this new AI landscape.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":37769,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Pathology Informatics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2153353923001566/pdfft?md5=41b1d6a95706d03ee5115451f14d73c3&pid=1-s2.0-S2153353923001566-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The ChatGPT conundrum: Human-generated scientific manuscripts misidentified as AI creations by AI text detection tool\",\"authors\":\"Hooman H. Rashidi ,&nbsp;Brandon D. Fennell ,&nbsp;Samer Albahra ,&nbsp;Bo Hu ,&nbsp;Tom Gorbett\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jpi.2023.100342\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>AI Chat Bots such as ChatGPT are revolutionizing our AI capabilities, especially in text generation, to help expedite many tasks, but they introduce new dilemmas. The detection of AI-generated text has become a subject of great debate considering the AI text detector’s known and unexpected limitations. Thus far, much research in this area has focused on the detection of AI-generated text; however, the goal of this study was to evaluate the opposite scenario, an AI-text detection tool's ability to discriminate human-generated text. Thousands of abstracts from several of the most well-known scientific journals were used to test the predictive capabilities of these detection tools, assessing abstracts from 1980 to 2023. We found that the AI text detector erroneously identified up to 8% of the known real abstracts as AI-generated text. This further highlights the current limitations of such detection tools and argues for novel detectors or combined approaches that can address this shortcoming and minimize its unanticipated consequences as we navigate this new AI landscape.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":37769,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Pathology Informatics\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2153353923001566/pdfft?md5=41b1d6a95706d03ee5115451f14d73c3&pid=1-s2.0-S2153353923001566-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Pathology Informatics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2153353923001566\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Pathology Informatics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2153353923001566","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

像ChatGPT这样的人工智能聊天机器人正在彻底改变我们的人工智能能力,特别是在文本生成方面,以帮助加快许多任务,但它们引入了新的困境。考虑到人工智能文本检测器已知的和意想不到的局限性,人工智能生成文本的检测已经成为一个非常有争议的话题。到目前为止,这一领域的许多研究都集中在人工智能生成文本的检测上;然而,本研究的目的是评估相反的情况,即人工智能文本检测工具区分人类生成文本的能力。研究人员使用了来自几家最知名科学期刊的数千篇摘要来测试这些检测工具的预测能力,评估了1980年至2023年的摘要。我们发现,人工智能文本检测器错误地将多达8%的已知真实摘要识别为人工智能生成的文本。这进一步强调了这些检测工具目前的局限性,并提出了新的检测器或组合方法,可以解决这一缺点,并在我们导航新的人工智能领域时最大限度地减少其意想不到的后果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
The ChatGPT conundrum: Human-generated scientific manuscripts misidentified as AI creations by AI text detection tool

AI Chat Bots such as ChatGPT are revolutionizing our AI capabilities, especially in text generation, to help expedite many tasks, but they introduce new dilemmas. The detection of AI-generated text has become a subject of great debate considering the AI text detector’s known and unexpected limitations. Thus far, much research in this area has focused on the detection of AI-generated text; however, the goal of this study was to evaluate the opposite scenario, an AI-text detection tool's ability to discriminate human-generated text. Thousands of abstracts from several of the most well-known scientific journals were used to test the predictive capabilities of these detection tools, assessing abstracts from 1980 to 2023. We found that the AI text detector erroneously identified up to 8% of the known real abstracts as AI-generated text. This further highlights the current limitations of such detection tools and argues for novel detectors or combined approaches that can address this shortcoming and minimize its unanticipated consequences as we navigate this new AI landscape.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Pathology Informatics
Journal of Pathology Informatics Medicine-Pathology and Forensic Medicine
CiteScore
3.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
2
审稿时长
18 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Pathology Informatics (JPI) is an open access peer-reviewed journal dedicated to the advancement of pathology informatics. This is the official journal of the Association for Pathology Informatics (API). The journal aims to publish broadly about pathology informatics and freely disseminate all articles worldwide. This journal is of interest to pathologists, informaticians, academics, researchers, health IT specialists, information officers, IT staff, vendors, and anyone with an interest in informatics. We encourage submissions from anyone with an interest in the field of pathology informatics. We publish all types of papers related to pathology informatics including original research articles, technical notes, reviews, viewpoints, commentaries, editorials, symposia, meeting abstracts, book reviews, and correspondence to the editors. All submissions are subject to rigorous peer review by the well-regarded editorial board and by expert referees in appropriate specialties.
期刊最新文献
Digital mapping of resected cancer specimens: The visual pathology report A precise machine learning model: Detecting cervical cancer using feature selection and explainable AI ViCE: An automated and quantitative program to assess intestinal tissue morphology Deep feature batch correction using ComBat for machine learning applications in computational pathology LVI-PathNet: Segmentation-classification pipeline for detection of lymphovascular invasion in whole slide images of lung adenocarcinoma
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1