Generative Artificial Intelligence : Generative AI In Research

Generative AI Limitations in Scientific Publishing

• Abstracts Written By ChatGPT Fool Scientists : Researchers Cannot Always Differentiate Between AI-Generated And Original Abstracts

Else, H. (2023). Abstracts written by ChatGPT fool scientists. Nature, 613, 423. doi: 10.1038/d41586-023-00056-7

• Artificial Intelligence Can Generate Fraudulent But Authentic-Looking Scientific Medical Articles : Pandora's Box Has Been Opened

Majovsky, M., Cerny, M., Kasal, M., Komarc, M., Netuka, D. (2023). Artificial intelligence can generate fraudulent but authentic-looking scientific medical articles. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 25, e46924. doi: 10.2196/46924

• AI And Science, What 1600 Researchers Think - A Nature Survey Finds That Scientists Are Concerned, As Well As Excited, By The Increasing Use of Artificial Intelligence Tools In Research.

van Noorden, R. & Perkel, J.M. (2023). AI and science, what 1600 researchers think. Nature, 621, 672-675. doi: 10.1038/d41586-023-02980-0

• ChatGPT : Five Priorities For Research - Conversational AI Is A Game-Changer For Science. Here's How To Respond.

van Dis, E.A.M., Bollen, J., Zuidema, W., Van Rooij, R. & Bockting, C.L. (2023). ChatGPT: five priorities for research. Nature, 614, 224-226. doi: 10.1038/d41586-023-00288-7

• ChatGPT Generates Fake Data Set To Support Scientific Hypothesis : Researchers Say That The Model Behind The Chatbot Fabricated A Convincing Bogus Database, But A Forensic Examination Shows It Doesn't Pass For Authentic

Naddaf, M. (2023). ChatGPT generates fake data set to support scientific hypothesis. Nature, 623, 895-896. doi: 10.1038/d41586-023-03635-w

• ChatGPT Listed As Author On Research Papers : Many Scientists Disapprove. At Least Four Articles Credit The AI Tool As A Co-Author, As Publishers Scramble To Regulate Its Use

Stokel-Walker, C. (2023). ChatGPT listed as author on research papers: many scientists disapprove. Nature, 613, 620-621. doi: 10.1038/d41586-023-00107-z

• ChatGPT Shouldn't Be Listed As JAMA Author - And ChatGPT Agrees

Zarefsky, M. (2023, April 21). ChatGPT shouldn't be listed as JAMA author - and ChatGPT agrees. American Medical Association.

• Fabrication And Errors In The Bibliographic Citations Generated By ChatGPT

Walters, W.H. & Wilder, E.I. (2023). Fabrication and errors in the bibliographic citations generated by ChatGPT. Nature, 13,14045. doi: 10.1038/s41598-023-41032-5

• How ChatGPT And Other AI Tools Could Disrupt Scientific Publishing : A World Of AI-Assisted Writing And Reviewing Might Transform The Nature Of The Scientific Paper

Conroy, G. (2023). How ChatGPT And Other AI Tools Could Disrupt Scientific Publishing. Nature, 622, 234-236. doi: 10.1038/d41586-023-03144-w

• Nonhuman "Authors" And Implications For The Integrity Of Scientific Publishing And Medical Knowledge

Flanagan, A., Bibbins-Domingo, K., & Berkwits, M. (2023). Nonhuman "authors" and implications for the integrity of scientific publishing and medical knowledge. JAMA, 329. 637–639. doi:10.1001/jama.2023.1344

• Robo-Writers : The Rise And Risks Of Language-Generating AI. A Remarkable AI Can Write Like Humans - But With No Understanding Of What It's Saying

Hutson, M. (2021). Robo-writers : the rise and risks of language-generating AI. Nature, 591, 22-25. doi: 10.1038/d41586-021-00530-0

• Scientific Sleuths Spot Dishonest ChatGPT Use In Papers : Manuscripts That Don't Disclose AI Assistance Are Slipping Past Peer Reviewers

Conroy, G. (2023). Scientific sleuths spot dishonest ChatGPT use in papers. Nature. doi: 10.1038/d41586-023-02477-w

• Scientists Used ChatGPT To Generate An Entire Paper From Scratch - But Is it Any Good? - By Designing An Autonomous System That Fed Prompts To The Chatbot, Researchers Produced A Paper That Was Fluent And Insightful. Yet They Still Have Concerns.

Conroy, G. (2023). Scientists used ChatGPT to generate an entire paper from scratch - but is it any good? Nature, 619, 443-444. doi: 10.1038/d41586-023-02218-z

Guidelines For The Use of Generative AI in Scientific Research And Publishing

• International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) - Defining The Role of Authors And Contributors
• International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) - Guidelines on how AI can be used in the preparation of text and figures
• National Institutes of Health (NIH) - The Use Of Generative Artificial Intelligence Technologies Is Prohibited For The NIH Peer Review Process (June 23, 2023)
• National Institutes Of Health (NIH) Grants and Funding - Use of Generative AI in Peer Review FAQs
• National Institutes Of Health (NIH) Office of Extramural Research - Using AI In Peer Review Is A Breach Of Confidentiality (June 23, 2023)
• National Science Foundation (NSF) - Notice To Research Community: Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence Technology In The NSF Merit Review Process (December 14, 2023)
• World Association of Medical Editors (WAME) - Chatbots, Generative AI, and Scholarly Manuscripts - Recommendations on Chatbots and Generative Artificial Intelligence in Relation to Scholarly Publications

Copyright Issues Regarding The Use Of Generative AI

• Congressional Research Service - Generative Artificial Intelligence and Copyright Law (September 29, 2023)

''...the Copyright Act affords copyright protection to 'original works of authorship.' Although the Constitution and the Copyright Act do not explicitly define who (or what) may be an 'author,' the U.S. Copyright Office recognizes copyright only in works 'created by a human being.' ...Courts have likewise declined to extend copyright protection to nonhuman authors."

• Copyright Office Launches New Artificial Intelligence Initiative (March 2023)

• Federal Register - U.S. National Archives - Copyright Registration Guidance: Works Containing Material Generated by Artificial Intelligence (March 2023)

Requires that works be authored by humans to receive copyright protection.

• Generative AI Has An Intellectual Property Problem - strategies to help companies mitigate the legal risk and ensure they comply with the law - Harvard Business Review

Appel, G., Neelbauer, J., & Schweidel, D.A. (2023). Generative AI has an intellectual property problem. Harvard Business Review.

PDF version accessible through TUC Library

• Tools Do Not Create : Human Authorship In The Use Of Generative Artificial Intelligence – Case Western Reserve Journal of Law, Technology & The Internet (July 2023)