Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 12

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 8 of the 8 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Editors’ Statement on the Responsible Use of Generative AI Technologies in Scholarly Journal Publishing

Kaebnick, Gregory E., Magnus, David Christopher, Kao, Audiey, Hosseini, Mohammad, Resnik, David, Dubljević, Veljko, Rentmeester, Christy, Gordijn, Bert, Cherry, Mark J.·2023·Ethics & Human Research

Abstract

Generative artificial intelligence (AI) has the potential to transform many aspects of scholarly publishing. Authors, peer reviewers, and editors might use AI in a variety of ways, and those uses might augment their existing work or might instead be intended to replace it. We are editors of bioethics and humanities journals who have been contemplating the implications of this ongoing transformation. We believe that generative AI may pose a threat to the goals that animate our work but could also be valuable for achieving those goals. In the interests of fostering a wider conversation about how generative AI may be used, we have developed a preliminary set of recommendations for its use in scholarly publishing. We hope that the recommendations and rationales set out here will help the scholarly community navigate toward a deeper understanding of the strengths, limits, and challenges of AI for responsible scholarly work.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/eahr.500182

Cites

8 of 8 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Show all 8 references

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Kaebnick, G. E., Magnus, D. C., Kao, A., Hosseini, M., Resnik, D., Dubljević, V., Rentmeester, C., Gordijn, B., & Cherry, M. J.
Venue
Ethics & Human Research
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2023-09
Volume
45
Issue
5
Pages
39-43
ISSN
  • 2578-2355
  • 2578-2363
Cited by
12
References
8
Language
en
Funders
  • National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences
  • National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (UL1TR001422)
  • National Science Foundation (#2043612)

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.