ChatGPT-4和人类写的求职信的比较。

IF 1 4区 医学 Q3 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL Danish medical journal Pub Date : 2023-11-23
Can Deniz Deveci, Jason Joe Baker, Binyamin Sikander, Jacob Rosenberg
{"title":"ChatGPT-4和人类写的求职信的比较。","authors":"Can Deniz Deveci, Jason Joe Baker, Binyamin Sikander, Jacob Rosenberg","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Artificial intelligence has started to become a part of scientific studies and may help researchers with a wide range of tasks. However, no scientific studies have been published on its ussefulness in writing cover letters for scientific articles. This study aimed to determine whether Generative Pre-Trained Transformer (GPT)-4 is as good as humans in writing cover letters for scientific papers.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In this randomised non-inferiority study, we included two parallel arms consisting of cover letters written by humans and by GPT-4. Each arm had 18 cover letters, which were assessed by three different blinded assessors. The assessors completed a questionnaire in which they had to assess the cover letters with respect to impression, readability, criteria satisfaction, and degree of detail. Subsequently, we performed readability tests with Lix score and Flesch Kincaid grade level.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>No significant or relevant difference was found on any parameter. A total of 61% of the blinded assessors guessed correctly as to whether the cover letter was written by GPT-4 or a human. GPT-4 had a higher score according to our objective readability tests. Nevertheless, it performed better than human writing on readability in the subjective assessments.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>We found that GPT-4 was non-inferior at writing cover letters compared to humans. This may be used to streamline cover letters for researchers, providing an equal chance to all researchers for advancement to peer-review.</p><p><strong>Funding: </strong>This study received no financial support from external sources.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>This study was not registered before the study commenced.</p>","PeriodicalId":11119,"journal":{"name":"Danish medical journal","volume":"70 12","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A comparison of cover letters written by ChatGPT-4 or humans.\",\"authors\":\"Can Deniz Deveci, Jason Joe Baker, Binyamin Sikander, Jacob Rosenberg\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Artificial intelligence has started to become a part of scientific studies and may help researchers with a wide range of tasks. However, no scientific studies have been published on its ussefulness in writing cover letters for scientific articles. This study aimed to determine whether Generative Pre-Trained Transformer (GPT)-4 is as good as humans in writing cover letters for scientific papers.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In this randomised non-inferiority study, we included two parallel arms consisting of cover letters written by humans and by GPT-4. Each arm had 18 cover letters, which were assessed by three different blinded assessors. The assessors completed a questionnaire in which they had to assess the cover letters with respect to impression, readability, criteria satisfaction, and degree of detail. Subsequently, we performed readability tests with Lix score and Flesch Kincaid grade level.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>No significant or relevant difference was found on any parameter. A total of 61% of the blinded assessors guessed correctly as to whether the cover letter was written by GPT-4 or a human. GPT-4 had a higher score according to our objective readability tests. Nevertheless, it performed better than human writing on readability in the subjective assessments.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>We found that GPT-4 was non-inferior at writing cover letters compared to humans. This may be used to streamline cover letters for researchers, providing an equal chance to all researchers for advancement to peer-review.</p><p><strong>Funding: </strong>This study received no financial support from external sources.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>This study was not registered before the study commenced.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":11119,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Danish medical journal\",\"volume\":\"70 12\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-11-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Danish medical journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Danish medical journal","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

导读:人工智能已经开始成为科学研究的一部分,可以帮助研究人员完成广泛的任务。然而,还没有科学研究表明它在为科学文章写求职信方面的作用。这项研究旨在确定生成预训练变压器(GPT)-4在为科学论文写求职信方面是否和人类一样好。方法:在这项随机非劣效性研究中,我们纳入了两个平行组,包括由人类和GPT-4撰写的求职信。每组有18封求职信,由三位不同的盲法评估者评估。评估人员完成了一份调查问卷,在问卷中,他们必须评估求职信的印象、可读性、标准满意度和细节程度。随后,我们用Lix分数和Flesch Kincaid等级水平进行了可读性测试。结果:各参数无显著性差异或相关差异。共有61%的盲法评估者正确猜测了求职信是由GPT-4还是人类写的。根据我们的客观可读性测试,GPT-4得分更高。然而,在主观评估中,它比人类写作的可读性要好。结论:我们发现GPT-4在写求职信方面并不比人类差。这可以用来简化研究人员的求职信,为所有研究人员提供平等的晋升同行评审的机会。经费:本研究未获得外部资金支持。试验注册:本研究开始前未注册。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
A comparison of cover letters written by ChatGPT-4 or humans.

Introduction: Artificial intelligence has started to become a part of scientific studies and may help researchers with a wide range of tasks. However, no scientific studies have been published on its ussefulness in writing cover letters for scientific articles. This study aimed to determine whether Generative Pre-Trained Transformer (GPT)-4 is as good as humans in writing cover letters for scientific papers.

Methods: In this randomised non-inferiority study, we included two parallel arms consisting of cover letters written by humans and by GPT-4. Each arm had 18 cover letters, which were assessed by three different blinded assessors. The assessors completed a questionnaire in which they had to assess the cover letters with respect to impression, readability, criteria satisfaction, and degree of detail. Subsequently, we performed readability tests with Lix score and Flesch Kincaid grade level.

Results: No significant or relevant difference was found on any parameter. A total of 61% of the blinded assessors guessed correctly as to whether the cover letter was written by GPT-4 or a human. GPT-4 had a higher score according to our objective readability tests. Nevertheless, it performed better than human writing on readability in the subjective assessments.

Conclusion: We found that GPT-4 was non-inferior at writing cover letters compared to humans. This may be used to streamline cover letters for researchers, providing an equal chance to all researchers for advancement to peer-review.

Funding: This study received no financial support from external sources.

Trial registration: This study was not registered before the study commenced.

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
Danish medical journal
Danish medical journal MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL-
CiteScore
2.30
自引率
6.20%
发文量
78
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The Danish Medical Journal (DMJ) is a general medical journal. The journal publish original research in English – conducted in or in relation to the Danish health-care system. When writing for the Danish Medical Journal please remember target audience which is the general reader. This means that the research area should be relevant to many readers and the paper should be presented in a way that most readers will understand the content. DMJ will publish the following articles: • Original articles • Protocol articles from large randomized clinical trials • Systematic reviews and meta-analyses • PhD theses from Danish faculties of health sciences • DMSc theses from Danish faculties of health sciences.
期刊最新文献
Compliance with endocrine therapy among breast cancer survivors. Counselling and prescription of contraception related to pregnancy termination. Adrenomedullin in pulmonary hypertension. A novel acute basic palliation concept for patients without specialised palliative needs. Adjuvant steroid to percutaneous needle fasciotomy for Dupuytren's contracture. An RCT study protocol.
×
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