导航人工智能对学术著述的影响:技术时代的透明度和责任

IF 0.3 Q3 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL European Journal of Therapeutics Pub Date : 2023-08-24 DOI:10.58600/eurjther1811
Ş. Şahin, Burak Erkmen
{"title":"导航人工智能对学术著述的影响:技术时代的透明度和责任","authors":"Ş. Şahin, Burak Erkmen","doi":"10.58600/eurjther1811","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Dear Editors,\nWe are writing in response to your recent editorials regarding the captivating subject of employing artificial intelligence (AI) in the composition of scholarly documents, with a specific focus on the notion of co-authoring with artificial intelligence [1,2]. We would like to express my appreciation to the European Journal of Therapeutics for its diligent commitment to upholding the ethical standards and academic integrity of scholarly publications. In the context of the swiftly progressing technological era, it is important to exercise caution in the utilization of AI in order to uphold our established academic and scientific customs. We concur with the perspective that the incorporation of AI in the production of scholarly papers ought to be explicitly disclosed within the methodology section, in light of its escalating significance in the composition procedure. Ensuring transparency is crucial, as it facilitates a comprehensive understanding of the impact that AI may have on output, including both good and negative implications [3].\nNevertheless, while we acknowledge the utility of AI, we respectfully hold a dissenting viewpoint about the proposition of attributing co-authorship to an AI system such as ChatGPT. The act of being an author entails a level of responsibility that beyond the capabilities of even the most capable AI tool. The AI system lacks the ability to comprehend, analyze, or morally assess the subtleties inherent in the work it contributed to, therefore cannot be held responsible for the accuracy and implications of the work produced. AI serves as a valuable tool for researchers, enhancing both their efficiency and the overall quality of their work [4]. Sophisticated laboratory equipment and complicated statistical software are not regarded as co-authors. The same logic applies to AI. The recognition of AI's significance in academia is crucial, but only to the extent of AI's essence and constraints. A tool serves as a supplementary resource to expedite and enhance the processes of research and writing, although it should not be regarded as an autonomous contributor.\nAs the dialogue around this topic continues to evolve, we look forward to seeing how international organizations such as ICMJE and COPE will adapt to this development [5]. With their solid criteria and careful tuning, they can guide us towards a future where we use AI effectively and ethically. Thank you for initiating this important conversation.\nSincerely yours,","PeriodicalId":42642,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Therapeutics","volume":"122 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Navigating the Impact of Artificial Intelligence on Scholarly Authorship: Transparency and Responsibility in the Technological Era\",\"authors\":\"Ş. Şahin, Burak Erkmen\",\"doi\":\"10.58600/eurjther1811\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Dear Editors,\\nWe are writing in response to your recent editorials regarding the captivating subject of employing artificial intelligence (AI) in the composition of scholarly documents, with a specific focus on the notion of co-authoring with artificial intelligence [1,2]. We would like to express my appreciation to the European Journal of Therapeutics for its diligent commitment to upholding the ethical standards and academic integrity of scholarly publications. In the context of the swiftly progressing technological era, it is important to exercise caution in the utilization of AI in order to uphold our established academic and scientific customs. We concur with the perspective that the incorporation of AI in the production of scholarly papers ought to be explicitly disclosed within the methodology section, in light of its escalating significance in the composition procedure. Ensuring transparency is crucial, as it facilitates a comprehensive understanding of the impact that AI may have on output, including both good and negative implications [3].\\nNevertheless, while we acknowledge the utility of AI, we respectfully hold a dissenting viewpoint about the proposition of attributing co-authorship to an AI system such as ChatGPT. The act of being an author entails a level of responsibility that beyond the capabilities of even the most capable AI tool. The AI system lacks the ability to comprehend, analyze, or morally assess the subtleties inherent in the work it contributed to, therefore cannot be held responsible for the accuracy and implications of the work produced. AI serves as a valuable tool for researchers, enhancing both their efficiency and the overall quality of their work [4]. Sophisticated laboratory equipment and complicated statistical software are not regarded as co-authors. The same logic applies to AI. The recognition of AI's significance in academia is crucial, but only to the extent of AI's essence and constraints. A tool serves as a supplementary resource to expedite and enhance the processes of research and writing, although it should not be regarded as an autonomous contributor.\\nAs the dialogue around this topic continues to evolve, we look forward to seeing how international organizations such as ICMJE and COPE will adapt to this development [5]. With their solid criteria and careful tuning, they can guide us towards a future where we use AI effectively and ethically. Thank you for initiating this important conversation.\\nSincerely yours,\",\"PeriodicalId\":42642,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Journal of Therapeutics\",\"volume\":\"122 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-08-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Journal of Therapeutics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.58600/eurjther1811\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Therapeutics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.58600/eurjther1811","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"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

亲爱的编辑们:我们写这封信是为了回应你们最近关于在学术论文中使用人工智能(AI)的迷人主题的社论,特别关注与人工智能共同创作的概念[1,2]。我们要感谢《欧洲治疗学杂志》在维护学术出版物的道德标准和学术诚信方面所做的努力。在快速发展的科技时代背景下,为了维护我们既定的学术和科学习俗,在使用人工智能时必须谨慎行事。我们同意人工智能在学术论文制作中的结合应该在方法论部分明确披露的观点,鉴于其在写作过程中的重要性不断升级。确保透明度至关重要,因为它有助于全面了解人工智能可能对产出产生的影响,包括正面和负面影响[3]。然而,虽然我们承认人工智能的效用,但我们对将共同作者身份归因于ChatGPT等人工智能系统的主张持不同意见。作为一名作者所需要承担的责任甚至超过了最强大的人工智能工具的能力。人工智能系统缺乏理解、分析或道德评估其所贡献的工作中固有的微妙之处的能力,因此不能对所产生工作的准确性和含义负责。人工智能是研究人员的宝贵工具,可以提高他们的工作效率和整体工作质量[4]。复杂的实验室设备和复杂的统计软件不被视为共同作者。同样的逻辑也适用于人工智能。学术界对人工智能重要性的认识是至关重要的,但仅限于人工智能的本质和约束。工具可以作为辅助资源来加速和加强研究和写作的过程,尽管它不应该被视为一个自主的贡献者。随着围绕这一主题的对话不断发展,我们期待看到ICMJE和COPE等国际组织如何适应这一发展[5]。有了他们坚实的标准和仔细的调整,他们可以引导我们走向一个有效和道德地使用人工智能的未来。谢谢你发起这次重要的谈话。谨致问候,
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
Navigating the Impact of Artificial Intelligence on Scholarly Authorship: Transparency and Responsibility in the Technological Era
Dear Editors, We are writing in response to your recent editorials regarding the captivating subject of employing artificial intelligence (AI) in the composition of scholarly documents, with a specific focus on the notion of co-authoring with artificial intelligence [1,2]. We would like to express my appreciation to the European Journal of Therapeutics for its diligent commitment to upholding the ethical standards and academic integrity of scholarly publications. In the context of the swiftly progressing technological era, it is important to exercise caution in the utilization of AI in order to uphold our established academic and scientific customs. We concur with the perspective that the incorporation of AI in the production of scholarly papers ought to be explicitly disclosed within the methodology section, in light of its escalating significance in the composition procedure. Ensuring transparency is crucial, as it facilitates a comprehensive understanding of the impact that AI may have on output, including both good and negative implications [3]. Nevertheless, while we acknowledge the utility of AI, we respectfully hold a dissenting viewpoint about the proposition of attributing co-authorship to an AI system such as ChatGPT. The act of being an author entails a level of responsibility that beyond the capabilities of even the most capable AI tool. The AI system lacks the ability to comprehend, analyze, or morally assess the subtleties inherent in the work it contributed to, therefore cannot be held responsible for the accuracy and implications of the work produced. AI serves as a valuable tool for researchers, enhancing both their efficiency and the overall quality of their work [4]. Sophisticated laboratory equipment and complicated statistical software are not regarded as co-authors. The same logic applies to AI. The recognition of AI's significance in academia is crucial, but only to the extent of AI's essence and constraints. A tool serves as a supplementary resource to expedite and enhance the processes of research and writing, although it should not be regarded as an autonomous contributor. As the dialogue around this topic continues to evolve, we look forward to seeing how international organizations such as ICMJE and COPE will adapt to this development [5]. With their solid criteria and careful tuning, they can guide us towards a future where we use AI effectively and ethically. Thank you for initiating this important conversation. Sincerely yours,
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
European Journal of Therapeutics
European Journal of Therapeutics MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL-
自引率
0.00%
发文量
48
期刊最新文献
Immunoglobulin-G4 Related Disease with Multiple Organ Involvement Welcome to the December 2023 Issue (Vol:29, No:4) and Current News of the European Journal of Therapeutics Protective Effect of Pomegranate Juice on Lead Acetate-Induced Liver Toxicity in Male Rats Tubuloside A Induces DNA Damage and Apoptosis in Human Ovarian Cancer A2780 Cells Correction to: Correlation of Diffusion-weighted MR imaging and FDG PET/CT in the Diagnosis of Metastatic Lymph Nodes of Head and Neck Malignant Tumors
×
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