Am I or AI? – A useful tool in (scientific) writing
A new article on the use of artificial intelligence (AI) in scientific writing caught my attention. It’s lurid headline says that a “Staggering 90% of biomedical papers now show signs of AI help”, suggesting widespread cheating by authors who let large language models (LLMs) do their work. However, in the article itself it then says that “LLM use was more frequent in abstracts, introductions and discussion sections than in methods and results sections”. This means AI was used to help with more general sections, less with the ones that contained the actual added-value of the papers and the original work of the authors – what was novel about the papers was written more often by the authors than what was known already (which was added with the help of AI). In my view, this makes a crucial difference. What is even more important, IMHO, is that the article concedes: “One problem with current AI-detection methods is that they can’t distinguish between a text generated by AI and one t...