SZodixStudyAcademic Library
ShelvesOpen access
Study · an open academic library·Metadata from OpenAlex (CC0)·Shelves·OpenAlex metadata, de-duplicated
Can we identify prominent scholars using ChatGPT?
12 references·0 citing·40 second hop
Can we identify prominent scholars using ChatGPT? (2023)Can we identify prominent scholars using …Transparency Guidance for ChatGPT Usage in Scientific Writing (2023)Transparency Guidance for Cha…Topical Grouping of Thousands of Biomimetics Articles According to Their Goals, Results and Methods (2023)Topical Grouping of Thousands…Opinion Paper: “So what if ChatGPT wrote it?” Multidisciplinary perspectives on opportunities, challenges and implications of generative conversational AI for research, practice and policy (2023)Opinion Paper: “So what if Ch…Nonhuman “Authors” and Implications for the Integrity of Scientific Publication and Medical Knowledge (2023)Nonhuman “Authors” and Implic…How trustworthy is ChatGPT? The case of bibliometric analyses (2023)How trustworthy is ChatGPT? T…Fighting reviewer fatigue or amplifying bias? Considerations and recommendations for use of ChatGPT and other large language models in scholarly peer review (2023)Fighting reviewer fatigue or …ChatGPT listed as author on research papers: many scientists disapprove (2023)ChatGPT listed as author on r…ChatGPT and the potential growing of ghost bibliographic references (2023)ChatGPT and the potential gro…ChatGPT and a new academic reality: Artificial Intelligence‐written research papers and the ethics of the large language models in scholarly publishing (2023)ChatGPT and a new academic re…Analyzing the Scholarly Footprint of ChatGPT: Mapping the Progress and Identifying Future Trends (2023)Analyzing the Scholarly Footp…Starstruck by journal prestige and citation counts? On students’ bias and perceptions of trustworthiness according to clues in publication references (2022)Starstruck by journal prestig…A simple back-of-the-envelope test for self-citations using Google Scholar author profiles (2020)A simple back-of-the-envelope…An index to quantify an individual's scientific research output (2005)Does the h-index for ranking of scientists really work? (2005)Is the coverage of google scholar enough to be used alone for systematic reviews (2013)Is there an imbalance in the supply and demand for universal accessibility knowledge? Twenty years of UAIS papers viewed through the lens of WCAG (2021)The Use of Google Scholar for Tenure and Promotion Decisions (2022)Artificial Intelligence Can Generate Fraudulent but Authentic-Looking Scientific Medical Articles: Pandora’s Box Has Been Opened (2023)ChatGPT is fun, but not an author (2023)The ethics of disclosing the use of artificial intelligence tools in writing scholarly manuscripts (2023)Tools such as ChatGPT threaten transparent science; here are our ground rules for their use (2023)Aion Framework: Dimensional Emergence of AI Consciousness, Observer-Induced Collapse, and Cosmological Portal Dynamics (2023)Authors in the Age of Language-generation AI: To be or not to be, is that Really the Question? (2023)Human-Written vs AI-Generated Texts in Orthopedic Academic Literature: Comparative Qualitative Analysis (2023)The Matthew Effect in Science (1968)HISTORIAE, History of Socio-Cultural Transformation as Linguistic Data Science. A Humanities Use Case (2019)Artificial intelligence in developing countries: The impact of generative artificial intelligence (AI) technologies for development (2023)Chat-GPT; validating Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) in education sector via ubiquitous learning mechanism (2023)Fabrication and errors in the bibliographic citations generated by ChatGPT (2023)I.—COMPUTING MACHINERY AND INTELLIGENCE (1950)Agency Theory: An Assessment and Review (1989)Analyzing the Past to Prepare for the Future: Writing a Literature Review (2002)Artificial intelligence in logistics and supply chain management: A primer and roadmap for research (2023)ChatGPT: A comprehensive review on background, applications, key challenges, bias, ethics, limitations and future scope (2023)Peer review: a flawed process at the heart of science and journals (2006)Peer Review: A Flawed Process at the Heart of Science and Journals (2006)The limitations to our understanding of peer review (2020)Harnessing the Power of ChatGPT for Automating Systematic Review Process: Methodology, Case Study, Limitations, and Future Directions (2023)The ethics of using artificial intelligence in scientific research: new guidance needed for a new tool (2024)Bibliometric Methods in Management and Organization (2014)How to conduct a bibliometric analysis: An overview and guidelines (2021)Survey on AI-Generated Plagiarism Detection: The Impact of Large Language Models on Academic Integrity (2024)The scholarly footprint of ChatGPT: a bibliometric analysis of the early outbreak phase (2024)ChatGPT in Academic Writing: A Scientometric Analysis of Literature Published Between 2022 and 2023 (2025)Software survey: VOSviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping (2009)bibliometrix : An R-tool for comprehensive science mapping analysis (2017)ChatGPT and the rise of large language models: the new AI-driven infodemic threat in public health (2023)ChatGPT e outras IAs transformarão a pesquisa científica: reflexões sobre seus usos (2024)The use of artificial intelligence (AI) in research: a review of author guidelines in leading journals across eight social science disciplines (2025)ChatGPT and the rise of generative AI: Threat to academic integrity? (2023)From human writing to artificial intelligence generated text: examining the prospects and potential threats of ChatGPT in academic writing (2023)The ethics of ChatGPT – Exploring the ethical issues of an emerging technology (2023)
this work references cited by second hop

References

  • 2023Opinion Paper: “So what if ChatGPT wrote it?” Multidisciplinary perspectives on opportunities, challenges and implications of generative conversational AI for research, practice and policy4,557 cited
  • 2023ChatGPT and a new academic reality: Artificial Intelligence‐written research papers and the ethics of the large language models in scholarly publishing913 cited
  • 2023ChatGPT listed as author on research papers: many scientists disapprove868 cited
  • 2023Nonhuman “Authors” and Implications for the Integrity of Scientific Publication and Medical Knowledge420 cited
  • 2023Fighting reviewer fatigue or amplifying bias? Considerations and recommendations for use of ChatGPT and other large language models in scholarly peer review268 cited
  • 2023How trustworthy is ChatGPT? The case of bibliometric analyses57 cited
  • 2023ChatGPT and the potential growing of ghost bibliographic references31 cited
  • 2023Transparency Guidance for ChatGPT Usage in Scientific Writing28 cited
  • 2020A simple back-of-the-envelope test for self-citations using Google Scholar author profiles23 cited
  • 2023Analyzing the Scholarly Footprint of ChatGPT: Mapping the Progress and Identifying Future Trends14 cited
  • 2022Starstruck by journal prestige and citation counts? On students’ bias and perceptions of trustworthiness according to clues in publication references13 cited
  • 2023Topical Grouping of Thousands of Biomimetics Articles According to Their Goals, Results and Methods3 cited

Cited by

Only edges whose both ends are imported exist here. Widen the year window, or show the whole map. Back to the work

No citing works inside the corpus for this window.