@cobalt @ct_bergstrom I note "A sample of scientific papers with signs of GPT-use found on Google Scholar was retrieved".

So a majority of the papers that were flagged as potentially fraudulent were in fact made using the text generator.

That is already quite bad enough, since the number of fraudulent papers indexed by Google Scholar with just a couple of obvious tells of ChatGPT is apparently >100.

@johntimaeus @ct_bergstrom

> Once men turned their thinking over to machines in the hope that this would set them free. But that only permitted other men with machines to enslave them.

> The target of the Jihad was a machine-attitude as much as the machines ... Humans had set those machines to usurp our sense of beauty, our necessary selfdom out of which we make living judgments.

It’s funny, both Tolkien and Herbert had strong Ludditism in their stories, and many AI nerds are likely fans.

@simonzerafa
> All scientific publications and journals should immediately require a declaration from authors that no LLM/AI systems were used in the generation of results or the paper being published

... and convincing evidence of a false declaration ought to be grounds for being banned from publishing, by all credible academic journals. For at least 5 years, if not permanently.

@ct_bergstrom

@simonzerafa @ct_bergstrom many do, but only some authors comply. That casts doubt on all submissions, unfortunately. And, at least for now, we can only really identify LLM use when authors submit with obvious editing failures. That's what this paper caught - also I document here as best I can:
https://peeraireview.com/search.html

The future is pretty simple... We have to view all papers starting in 2023 as potentially containing GenAI content, unless we know and trust the authors.

@tengkuizdihar Yeah, so read the article.

By and large this is not peer reviewed literature.

(2/2)

"China continues to have problems with research integrity and has the highest number of retractions of any country due to plagiarism, invented data and fake peer review, but is seeking to improve this by removing cash incentives and use of plagiarism software."

#KenHyland, 2023

https://doi.org/10.1002/leap.1545

@nini @ct_bergstrom And that bit about reaching a point where there's no longer an aim of twisting or replacing the truth but destroying the notion of truth altogether.

Vanishing all signal in a total wave of noise means inviting all who fear, or are overwhelmed by, the responsibility of decisionmaking to amputate all higher mental function, reason, values, offering carte blanche to run with whatever is most gratifying, easiest, most comfortable. Become livestock.