||
ChatGPT被列为研究论文作者:许多科学家不赞成
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36653617/
Nature
. 2023 Jan;613(7945):620-621.
doi: 10.1038/d41586-023-00107-z.
PMID: 36653617
No abstract available
Keywords: Ethics; Publishing.
Tools such as ChatGPT threaten transparent science; here are our ground rules for their use.
Nature. 2023 Jan;613(7945):612. doi: 10.1038/d41586-023-00191-1.PMID: 36694020 No abstract available.
Abstracts written by ChatGPT fool scientists.
Nature. 2023 Jan;613(7944):423. doi: 10.1038/d41586-023-00056-7.PMID: 36635510 No abstract available.
J Med Ethics. 2013 Aug;39(8):509-12. doi: 10.1136/medethics-2012-100568. Epub 2012 Aug 3.PMID: 22865926
Publishing in Oncology Nursing: A Look to the Past, Present, and Future.
Semin Oncol Nurs. 2018 Nov;34(4):329-337. doi: 10.1016/j.soncn.2018.09.001. Epub 2018 Sep 27.PMID: 30270140 Review.
Natl Med J India. 2020 Jan-Feb;33(1):24-30. doi: 10.4103/0970-258X.308238.PMID: 33565483 Review.
Kung, T. H. et al. Preprint at medRxiv https://doi.org/10.1101/2022.12.19.22283643 (2022).
GPT, Osmanovic Thunström, A. & Steingrimsson, S. Preprint at HAL https://hal.science/hal-03701250 (2022).
Artificial Intelligence* / legislation & jurisprudence
Artificial Intelligence* / trends
Authorship*
Publishing* / legislation & jurisprudence
Publishing* / trends
Research Report* / standards
Research Report* / trends
Archiver|手机版|科学网 ( 京ICP备07017567号-12 )
GMT+8, 2024-11-23 12:41
Powered by ScienceNet.cn
Copyright © 2007- 中国科学报社