The DOI matches its Crossref record; 10 of the 10 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Using AI to write scholarly publications
Open accessAbstract
Artificial intelligence (AI) natural language processing (NLP) systems, such as OpenAI's generative pre-trained transformer (GPT) model (https://openai. com) or Meta's Galactica (https://galactica.org/)may soon be widely used in many forms of writing, including scientific and scholarly publications (Heaven 2022). 1 While computer programs (such as Microsoft WORD and Grammarly) have incorporated automated text-editing features (such as checking for spelling and grammar) for many years, these programs are not designed to create content.However, new and emerging NLP systems are, which raises important issues for research ethics and research integrity.2 NLP is a way of enabling computers to interact with human language.A key step in NLP, known as tokenization, involves converting unstructured text into structured text suitable for computation.For example, the sentence "The cat sat on the mat" can be structured by tagging its parts: "the [article] cat [noun] sat [verb, past tense] on [preposition] the [article] mat [noun]."Once the parts of the text have been tagged, they can be processed by means of algorithms designed to produce appropriate responses to text (i.e., language generation).Rudimentary NLP-systems, such as the first generation of chatbots that assisted customers on websites, operated according to thousands of human-written rules for processing and generating text.Recent advances in computational speed and capacity and the development of machine-learning (ML) algorithms, such as neural networks, have led to tremendous breakthroughs in NLP (Mitchell 2020).Today's NLP systems use ML to produce and refine statistical models (with billions of parameters) for processing and generating natural language.NLP systems are trained on huge databases (45 terabytes or more) of text available on the internet or other sources.Initial training (or supervised learning) involves giving the system the text and then "rewarding" it for giving correct outputs, as determined by human trainers.3 Over time, NLP systems will reduce their percentage of erroneous outputs and will learn from the data (Mitchell 2020).While NLP systems continue to learn as they receive and process data beyond their initial training data, they do not "know" the meaning or truth-CONTACT
Overview
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
Verification
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?
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Currently, several journals have attempted to develop guidelines [28, 29].”
From Fighting reviewer fatigue or amplifying bias? Considerations and recommendations for use of ChatGPT and other large language models in scholarly peer review (2023) · cites this paper as [28]
In the citing paper
“A final issue is that AI tools will tend to generate output that reproduces or amplifies biases inherent within the source data [19].”
From Artificial intelligence-assisted academic writing: recommendations for ethical use (2025) · cites this paper as [19]
In the citing paper
“While new models of ChatGPT have ‘learned’ compared to prior releases, they cannot differentiate between real and factitious data that is received, integrated and used to generate new content [19].”
From Artificial intelligence-assisted academic writing: recommendations for ethical use (2025) · cites this paper as [19]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
The role of AI in drug discovery: challenges, opportunities, and strategies
Blanco-González, A., Cabezón, A., Seco-González, A., Conde-Torres, D., Antelo-Riveiro, P., Piñeiro, Á., & Garcia-Fandino, R. (2023) · Pharmaceuticals · doi:10.3390/ph16060891 · Cited by 690
AI bot ChatGPT writes smart essays — should professors worry?
Stokel-Walker, C. (2022) · Nature · doi:10.1038/d41586-022-04397-7 · Cited by 543 · cited 1×
“For more on this see Stokel-Walker (2022).”
What's in a picture? The temptation of image manipulation
Rossner, M., & Yamada, K. M. (2004) · The Journal of Cell Biology · doi:10.1083/jcb.200406019 · Cited by 412 · cited 1×
“Ethical problems related to the misuse of statistics programs and digital image manipulation are well-known and have unfortunately been the subject of numerous research misconduct investigations (Gardenier and Resnik 2002; Rossner and Yamada 2004; Cromey 2013; Shamoo and Resnik 2022).”
Responsible Conduct of Research
Shamoo, A. E., & Resnik, D. B. (2022) · doi:10.1093/oso/9780197547090.001.0001 · Cited by 224
Self-citationAuthorship policies of scientific journals: Table 1
Resnik, D. B., Tyler, A. M., Black, J., & Kissling, G. E. (2015) · Journal of Medical Ethics · doi:10.1136/medethics-2015-103171 · Cited by 88
Self-citationThe Misuse of Statistics: Concepts, Tools, and a Research Agenda
Gardenier, J. S., & Resnik, D. B. (2002) · Accountability in Research · doi:10.1080/08989620212968 · Cited by 87 · cited 1×
“Ethical problems related to the misuse of statistics programs and digital image manipulation are well-known and have unfortunately been the subject of numerous research misconduct investigations (Gardenier and Resnik 2002; Rossner and Yamada 2004; Cromey 2013; Shamoo and Resnik 2022).”
Self-citationDigital images are data: and should be treated as such
Cromey, D. W. (2012) · Methods in Molecular Biology · doi:10.1007/978-1-62703-056-4_1 · Cited by 82 · cited 1×
“Ethical problems related to the misuse of statistics programs and digital image manipulation are well-known and have unfortunately been the subject of numerous research misconduct investigations (Gardenier and Resnik 2002; Rossner and Yamada 2004; Cromey 2013; Shamoo and Resnik 2022).”
Limits on risks for healthy volunteers in biomedical research
Resnik, D. B. (2011) · Metamedicine · doi:10.1007/s11017-011-9201-1 · Cited by 63
Self-citationKohl, M. (2015) · The Philosophical Quarterly · doi:10.1093/pq/pqv044 · Cited by 54 · cited 1×
“The OpenAI chatbot gave a completely incorrect answer to this query, because Kant explicitly said that ought implies can (Kohl 2015).”
Evolution and adoption of contributor role ontologies and taxonomies
Hosseini, M., Colomb, J., Holcombe, A. O., Kern, B., Vasilevsky, N., & Holmes, K. (2022) · Learned Publishing · doi:10.1002/leap.1496 · Cited by 16 · cited 1×
“…(Resnik et al. 2016), and widely used contributor roles taxonomies (e.g., CRediT) make clear distinctions between writing the first draft and revising it (Hosseini et al. 2022), use of NLP systems should be acknowledged in the text (e.g., methods section) and mentioned in the references section.”
Self-citation
Research works printed but not linked: 3
- Cell Press. 2022. Cell Press Digital Image Guidelines. Last accessed December 15 2022. https://www.cell.com/figureguidelines.
- International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. (2023). Preparing a Manuscript for Submission to a Medical Journal. Last accessed January 10 2023. https://www.icmje.org/recommendations/browse/manuscript-preparation/preparing-for-submission.html.
- Mitchell, M. 2020. Artificial Intelligence: A Thinking Guide for Humans. New York, NY: Picador.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Zhai, C., Wibowo, S., & Li, L. D. (2024) · Smart Learning Environments · doi:10.1186/s40561-024-00316-7 · Cited by 1,567
“…AI hallucinations, plagiarism, lack of transparency, and algorithmic biases, there arises a critical concern that over-reliance on AI dialogue systems’ decision-making capabilities might potentially impede the cultivation of critical thinking skills (Carobene et al., 2023; Hosseini et al., 2023).”
BackgroundGao, C. A., Howard, F. M., Markov, N. S., Dyer, E. C., Ramesh, S., Luo, Y., & Pearson, A. T. (2023) · npj Digital Medicine · doi:10.1038/s41746-023-00819-6 · Cited by 1,099
“Different journals and publishers are developing their own policies on whether large language models can contribute to the writing of papers, ranging from not allowing any AI-generated text 12 to allowing its use as long as it is openly disclosed 13,14,28 .”
Johnson, D., Goodman, R., Patrinely, J., Stone, C., Zimmerman, E., Donald, R., Chang, S., Berkowitz, S., Finn, A., Jahangir, E., et al. (2023) · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-2566942/v1 · Cited by 598
Alqahtani, T., Badreldin, H. A., Alrashed, M., Alshaya, A. I., Alghamdi, S. S., bin Saleh, K., Alowais, S. A., Alshaya, O. A., Rahman, I., Al Yami, M. S., et al. (2023) · Research in Social and Administrative Pharmacy · doi:10.1016/j.sapharm.2023.05.016 · Cited by 565
Marzuki, Widiati, U., Rusdin, D., Darwin, & Indrawati, I. (2023) · Cogent Education · doi:10.1080/2331186x.2023.2236469 · Cited by 524
“In general, AI writing tools are intended to analyze written materials and provide comments on many parts of the writing, such as grammar, vocabulary, syntax, content, and structure (Hosseini et al., 2023; Strobl et al., 2019; Thorp, 2023).”
Background
Metadata
- Authors
- Hosseini, M., Rasmussen, L. M., & Resnik, D. B.
- Affiliations
- Northwestern University (US)
- University of North Carolina at Charlotte (US)
- National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (US)
- Corresponding author
- Resnik, David B.
- Venue
- Accountability in Research
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2023-01-25
- Volume
- 31
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- 715-723
- ISSN
- 0898-9621 (ISSN-L)
- 1545-5815
- PMC
- PMC10366336
- OpenAlex
- W4318035272
- Cited by
- 286
- References
- 10
- Citations by year
- 2026: 56 · 2025: 80 · 2024: 85 · 2023: 65
- FWCI
- 71.56
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- Accountability in Research (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences
- National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (UL1TR001422)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Education › Academic integrity and plagiarism
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
- Social Sciences › Library and Information Sciences › Academic Writing and Publishing
- Keywords
- AI-generated text, scholarly publishing, research ethics, research integrity, generative pre-trained transformer, large language models, tokenization, machine learning, chatbots, supervised learning, authorship attribution
- MeSH terms
- Scholarly Communication, Artificial Intelligence, Humans, Periodicals as Topic, Publications, Writing
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