查特GPT的诊断不可靠性用于期刊评估
Mehdi Dadkhah1,2, Marilyn H Oermann3, Mihály Hegedüs4
1Amrita School of Engineering, Amrita Vishwa Vidyapeetham, Amritapuri, Kerala, India.
Advanced pharmaceutical bulletin
|April 8, 2024
概括
人工智能工具ChatGPT在评估掠夺性和劫持期刊的质量方面被证明是不可靠的. 一个新的期刊检查器聊天机器人显示,它有望帮助研究人员识别这些有问题的出版物.
科学领域:
- 图书统计学 图书统计学
- 学术传播学术交流
- 研究中的人工智能.
背景情况:
- 掠夺性和劫持期刊的扩散对科学完整性,研究资金和信息传播构成重大威胁.
- 研究人员识别和避免这些期刊的现有工具是有限的.
- 这些期刊通常含有错误,使他们成为自动化质量评估的潜在目标.
研究的目的:
- 评估一个人工智能 (AI) 工具ChatGPT在评估掠夺性和被劫持期刊质量的有效性.
- 确定人工智能是否可以成为研究人员在应对不可靠的学术出版物所带来的挑战方面可靠的工具.
主要方法:
- 使用ChatGPT进行质量评估的掠夺性和劫持期刊的分析.
- 在期刊质量评估中评估ChatGPT发现的可靠性.
- 开发和讨论一个替代聊天机器人解决方案, 杂志检查器聊天机器人.
主要成果:
- 查查GPT被发现是一个不可靠的工具来评估被劫持和掠夺期刊的质量.
- 人工智能工具未能一致识别这些不可靠出版物的特点缺陷.
- 该研究强调了当前AI在这个特定应用中的局限性.
结论:
- 像ChatGPT这样的当前人工智能工具不适合在掠夺性和劫持期刊的背景下进行可靠的期刊质量评估.
- 一个早期的试用版本的Journal Checker Chatbot已经被开发出来,作为一个潜在的替代方案来协助研究人员.
- 需要进一步开发以创建有效的AI驱动工具来检测被劫持的期刊并确保学术完整性.
相关概念视频
Reliability and Validity
Reliability and validity are two important considerations that must be made with any type of data collection. Reliability refers to the ability to consistently produce a given result. In the context of psychological research, this would mean that any instruments or tools used to collect data do so in consistent, reproducible ways.
Errors In Hypothesis Tests
When performing a hypothesis test, there are four possible outcomes depending on the actual truth (or falseness) of the null hypothesis and the decision to reject or not.
Accuracy, limits, and approximation
Accuracy, limits, and approximations are common in many fields, especially in engineering calculations. These concepts are imperative for ensuring that a given value is as close as possible to its true value.
Accuracy is defined as the closeness of the measured value to the true or actual value. In engineering mechanics, repeated measurements are taken during theoretical or experimental analyses to ensure that the result is precise and accurate.
The accuracy of any solution is based on the...
Accuracy is defined as the closeness of the measured value to the true or actual value. In engineering mechanics, repeated measurements are taken during theoretical or experimental analyses to ensure that the result is precise and accurate.
The accuracy of any solution is based on the...
Systematic Error: Methodological and Sampling Errors
In the case of systematic errors, the sources can be identified, and the errors can be subsequently minimized by addressing these sources. According to the source, systematic errors can be divided into sampling, instrumental, methodological, and personal errors.
Sampling errors originate from improper sampling methods or the wrong sample population. These errors can be minimized by refining the sampling strategy. Defective instruments or faulty calibrations are the sources of instrumental...
Sampling errors originate from improper sampling methods or the wrong sample population. These errors can be minimized by refining the sampling strategy. Defective instruments or faulty calibrations are the sources of instrumental...
Detection of Gross Error: The Q Test
When one or more data points appear far from the rest of the data, there is a need to determine whether they are outliers and whether they should be eliminated from the data set to ensure an accurate representation of the measured value. In many cases, outliers arise from gross errors (or human errors) and do not accurately reflect the underlying phenomenon. In some cases, however, these apparent outliers reflect true phenomenological differences. In these cases, we can use statistical methods...
Accuracy and Errors in Hypothesis Testing
Hypothesis testing is a fundamental statistical tool that begins with the assumption that the null hypothesis H0 is true. During this process, two types of errors can occur: Type I and Type II. A Type I error refers to the incorrect rejection of a true null hypothesis, while a Type II error involves the failure to reject a false null hypothesis.
In hypothesis testing, the probability of making a Type I error, denoted as α, is commonly set at 0.05. This significance level indicates a 5% chance...
In hypothesis testing, the probability of making a Type I error, denoted as α, is commonly set at 0.05. This significance level indicates a 5% chance...


