SZodixStudyAcademic Library
ShelvesOpen access
Study · an open academic library·Metadata from OpenAlex (CC0)·Shelves·OpenAlex metadata, de-duplicated
Human versus artificial intelligence‐generated arthroplasty literature: A single‐blinded analysis of perceived communication, quality, and authorship source
7 references·0 citing·21 second hop
Human versus artificial intelligence‐generated arthroplasty literature: A single‐blinded analysis of perceived communication, quality, and authorship source (2024)Human versus artificial intelligence‐gene…The Impact of Artificial Intelligence (AI) Programs on Writing Scientific Research (2023)The Impact of Artificial Inte…Comparing scientific abstracts generated by ChatGPT to real abstracts with detectors and blinded human reviewers (2023)Comparing scientific abstract…ChatGPT listed as author on research papers: many scientists disapprove (2023)ChatGPT listed as author on r…ChatGPT and other artificial intelligence applications speed up scientific writing (2023)ChatGPT and other artificial …Abstracts written by ChatGPT fool scientists (2023)Abstracts written by ChatGPT …Could AI help you to write your next paper? (2022)Could AI help you to write yo…Using Effect Size—or Why the P Value Is Not Enough (2012)Using Effect Size—or Why the …ChatGPT is fun, but not an author (2023)Evaluating the efficacy of AI content detection tools in differentiating between human and AI-generated text (2023)Testing of detection tools for AI-generated text (2023)Tools such as ChatGPT threaten transparent science; here are our ground rules for their use (2023)Childhood adversity and adult depression: The protective role of psychological resilience (2017)Accuracy of Wristband Fitbit Models in Assessing Sleep: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (2019)Social media use intensity, social media use problems, and mental health among adolescents: Investigating directionality and mediating processes (2020)Academic Integrity considerations of AI Large Language Models in the post-pandemic era: ChatGPT and beyond (2023)Artificial intelligence in scientific writing: a friend or a foe? (2023)The false positives and false negatives of generative AI detection tools in education and academic research: The case of ChatGPT (2023)Artificial Intelligence Can Generate Fraudulent but Authentic-Looking Scientific Medical Articles: Pandora’s Box Has Been Opened (2023)ChatGPT and the rise of large language models: the new AI-driven infodemic threat in public health (2023)The Janus Effect of Generative AI: Charting the Path for Responsible Conduct of Scholarly Activities in Information Systems (2023)Balancing Innovation and Integrity: The Role of AI in Research and Scientific Writing (2023)Academic publisher guidelines on AI usage: A ChatGPT supported thematic analysis (2024)Publication Ethics in the Era of Artificial Intelligence (2024)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)ChatGPT: A comprehensive review on background, applications, key challenges, bias, ethics, limitations and future scope (2023)Investigating the Impact of User Trust on the Adoption and Use of ChatGPT: Survey Analysis (2023)
this work references cited by second hop

References

  • 2012Using Effect Size—or Why the P Value Is Not Enough5,550 cited
  • 2023Comparing scientific abstracts generated by ChatGPT to real abstracts with detectors and blinded human reviewers1,097 cited
  • 2023ChatGPT listed as author on research papers: many scientists disapprove868 cited
  • 2023Abstracts written by ChatGPT fool scientists610 cited
  • 2023ChatGPT and other artificial intelligence applications speed up scientific writing240 cited
  • 2022Could AI help you to write your next paper?226 cited
  • 2023The Impact of Artificial Intelligence (AI) Programs on Writing Scientific Research63 cited

Cited by

No citing works inside the corpus for this window.

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