SZodixStudyAcademic Library
ShelvesOpen access
Study · an open academic library·Metadata from OpenAlex (CC0)·Shelves·OpenAlex metadata, de-duplicated
The African Journal Partnership Program’s guidance on the use of AI in scholarly publishing
4 references·0 citing·15 second hop
The African Journal Partnership Program’s guidance on the use of AI in scholarly publishing (2024)The African Journal Partnership Program’s…Tools such as ChatGPT threaten transparent science; here are our ground rules for their use (2023)Tools such as ChatGPT threate…Guidance for Authors, Peer Reviewers, and Editors on Use of AI, Language Models, and Chatbots (2023)Guidance for Authors, Peer Re…ChatGPT is fun, but not an author (2023)ChatGPT is fun, but not an au…Chatbots, generative AI, and scholarly manuscripts (2023)Chatbots, generative AI, and …The limitations to our understanding of peer review (2020)Fighting reviewer fatigue or amplifying bias? Considerations and recommendations for use of ChatGPT and other large language models in scholarly peer review (2023)Nonhuman “Authors” and Implications for the Integrity of Scientific Publication and Medical Knowledge (2023)Can ChatGPT evaluate research quality? (2024)Reporting Use of AI in Research and Scholarly Publication—JAMA Network Guidance (2024)Use of Artificial Intelligence in Peer Review Among Top 100 Medical Journals (2024)Recommendations for the conduct, reporting, editing, and Publication of Scholarly Work in Medical Journals (2015)Challenges for enforcing editorial policies on AI-generated papers (2023)Ethical Dilemmas in Using AI for Academic Writing and an Example Framework for Peer Review in Nephrology Academia: A Narrative Review (2023)Death of a reviewer or death of peer review integrity? the challenges of using AI tools in peer reviewing and the need to go beyond publishing policies (2024)ChatGPT and the rise of generative AI: Threat to academic integrity? (2023)ChatGPT and the rise of large language models: the new AI-driven infodemic threat in public health (2023)Comparing scientific abstracts generated by ChatGPT to real abstracts with detectors and blinded human reviewers (2023)ChatGPT: A comprehensive review on background, applications, key challenges, bias, ethics, limitations and future scope (2023)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)
this work references cited by second hop

References

  • 2023ChatGPT is fun, but not an author1,433 cited
  • 2023Tools such as ChatGPT threaten transparent science; here are our ground rules for their use604 cited
  • 2023Guidance for Authors, Peer Reviewers, and Editors on Use of AI, Language Models, and Chatbots141 cited
  • 2023Chatbots, generative AI, and scholarly manuscripts130 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