Talk with ChatGPT about the outbreak of Mpox in 2022: reflections and suggestions from AI dimensions
Open accessAbstract
In the era of big data, generative artificial intelligence (AI) models are currently in a boom. The Chatbot Generative Pre-trained Transformer (ChatGPT), a large language model (LLM) developed by OpenAI (San Francisco, CA), is a type of AI software that could generate text based on the input it receives. In this study, in order to explore how ChatGPT could give reflections and suggestions about the sudden outbreak of Mpox in 2022 from the AI dimensions, our group talked with ChatGPT with several questions about Mpox. We hope this talk could enrich our knowledge on Mpox from the new AI dimensions and also explore the possibility of human and AI fight shoulder to shoulder for prevention and containment of the potential epidemics or pandemics in future.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
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?
ChatGPT is a large language model based on the GPT-3.5 architecture that can extract valuable information from massive text data and generate complex, human-like text to enable multi-round human-computer dialogue.
“ChatGPT (GenerativePre-trainTransformer) is a large language model (LLM) based on the GPT-3.5 architecture. It uses the logic of “big data + big computing power + algorithm = intelligent model,” which can extract valuable information from massive text data, and through training, generate more complex and humanized works to output answers and feedback in the form of text, So as to realize multi-rou”
From Reflection on whether Chat GPT should be banned by academia from the perspective of education and teaching (2023) · cites this paper as Cheng et al., 2023
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 9 · Cited by 43
- Authors
- Cheng, K., He, Y., Li, C., Xie, R., Lu, Y., Gu, S., & Wu, H.
- Affiliations
- Second Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University (CN)
- Beijing Sport University (CN)
- Peking University (CN)
- University of South China (CN)
- Duke Medical Center (US)
- Duke University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Gu, Shuqin
- Wu, Haiyang
- Venue
- Annals of Biomedical Engineering
- Published
- 2023-04-08
- Volume
- 51
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 870-874
- ISSN
- 0090-6964 (ISSN-L)
- 1573-9686
- PMC
- PMC10085783
- OpenAlex
- W4362716401
- Cited by
- 43
- References
- 9
- Citations by year
- 2026: 5 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 15
- FWCI
- 1.71
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Annals of Biomedical Engineering (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
- Life Sciences › Immunology and Microbiology › Virology › Poxvirus research and outbreaks
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Artificial Intelligence Applications
- Keywords
- monkeypox, 2022 mpox outbreak, ChatGPT, large language models, generative AI, pandemic preparedness, human-AI collaboration
- MeSH terms
- Artificial Intelligence, Disease Outbreaks, Humans, Electric Power Supplies, Software, Mpox, Monkeypox
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
