What the EU’s tough AI law means for research and ChatGPT
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Mitigating risks is a primary priority, exemplified by the European Union's strict legislation on transparency, bias, privacy and copyright principles.
“Mitigating risks is a primary priority, exemplified by the European Union's strict legislation on transparency, bias, privacy and copyright principles (Gibney, 2024).”
From A university framework for the responsible use of generative AI in research (2026) · cites this paper as Gibney, 2024
Cited by
Sorted by citations
A university framework for the responsible use of generative AI in research
Smith, S. M., Tate, M., Freeman, K., Walsh, A., Ballsun-Stanton, B., & Lane, M. (2026) · Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management · doi:10.1080/1360080x.2025.2509187 · Cited by 46 · see citing works
Perspectives for Open Source AI
Kazeeva, I. (2026) · i-lex · doi:10.60923/issn.1825-1927/23382
- Authors
- Gibney, E.
- Corresponding author
- Gibney, Elizabeth
- Venue
- Nature
- Published
- 2024-02-16
- Volume
- 626
- Issue
- 8001
- Pages
- 938-939
- ISSN
- 0028-0836 (ISSN-L)
- 1476-4687
- OpenAlex
- W4391878785
- Cited by
- 24
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 5 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 11
- FWCI
- 61.81
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Licence
- Locations
- Nature (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Law › Digitalization, Law, and Regulation
- Social Sciences › Safety Research › Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Law, AI, and Intellectual Property
- Keywords
- EU AI Act, AI regulation, general-purpose AI models, ChatGPT, large language models, AI law
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
