4.7 Article

Can artificial intelligence help for scientific writing?

期刊

CRITICAL CARE
卷 27, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

BMC
DOI: 10.1186/s13054-023-04380-2

关键词

Artificial intelligence; Scientific writing; Machine learning; Chatbots

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This paper discusses the use of Artificial Intelligence Chatbot in scientific writing, with a focus on ChatGPT, a chatbot developed by OpenAI. ChatGPT utilizes the GPT language model to understand and respond to natural language inputs. AI chatbots, including ChatGPT, are valuable tools in scientific writing, assisting researchers in material organization, draft generation, and proofreading. However, ethical concerns regarding plagiarism, accuracy, and accessibility imbalances need to be addressed, and a consensus on regulating the use of chatbots in scientific writing is necessary.
This paper discusses the use of Artificial Intelligence Chatbot in scientific writing. ChatGPT is a type of chatbot, developed by OpenAI, that uses the Generative Pre-trained Transformer (GPT) language model to understand and respond to natural language inputs. AI chatbot and ChatGPT in particular appear to be useful tools in scientific writing, assisting researchers and scientists in organizing material, generating an initial draft and/or in proofreading. There is no publication in the field of critical care medicine prepared using this approach; however, this will be a possibility in the next future. ChatGPT work should not be used as a replacement for human judgment and the output should always be reviewed by experts before being used in any critical decision-making or application. Moreover, several ethical issues arise about using these tools, such as the risk of plagiarism and inaccuracies, as well as a potential imbalance in its accessibility between high- and low-income countries, if the software becomes paying. For this reason, a consensus on how to regulate the use of chatbots in scientific writing will soon be required.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据