ChatGPT als (Mit-)Autor in wissenschaftlichen Arbeiten nennen?

Es gibt bereits klare Richtlinien für die Autorenschaft, die aussagen, dass ChatGPT nicht als Mitautor in wissenschaftlichen Arbeiten genannt werden sollte (via

«There are already clear authorship guidelines that mean ChatGPT shouldn’t be credited as a co-author, says Matt Hodgkinson, a research-integrity manager at the UK Research Integrity Office in London, speaking in a personal capacity. One guideline is that a co-author needs to make a “significant scholarly contribution” to the article — which might be possible with tools such as ChatGPT, he says. But it must also have the capacity to agree to be a co-author, and to take responsibility for a study — or, at least, the part it contributed to. “It’s really that second part on which the idea of giving an AI tool co-authorship really hits a roadblock,” he says.

Zhavoronkov says that when he tried to get ChatGPT to write papers more technical than the perspective he published, it failed. “It does very often return the statements that are not necessarily true, and if you ask it several times the same question, it will give you different answers,” he says. “So I will definitely be worried about the misuse of the system in academia, because now, people without domain expertise would be able to try and write scientific papers.”»

Dieser Beitrag wurde unter Selbständige Abschlussarbeiten, Wissenschaft abgelegt und mit verschlagwortet. Setzen Sie ein Lesezeichen auf den Permalink.

Schreiben Sie einen Kommentar

Ihre E-Mail-Adresse wird nicht veröffentlicht. Erforderliche Felder sind mit * markiert