SZodixStudyAcademic Library
ShelvesOpen access
Study · an open academic library·Metadata from OpenAlex (CC0)·Shelves·OpenAlex metadata, de-duplicated
How much are LLMs changing the language of academic papers after ChatGPT? A multi-database and full text analysis
9 references·0 citing·31 second hop
How much are LLMs changing the language of academic papers after ChatGPT? A multi-database and full text analysis (2026)How much are LLMs changing the language o…The adoption of Large Language Models in economics research (2025)The adoption of Large Languag…Using artificial intelligence in academic writing and research: An essential productivity tool (2024)Using artificial intelligence…How is ChatGPT acknowledged in academic publications? (2024)How is ChatGPT acknowledged i…Estimating the use of ChatGPT in dental research publications (2024)Estimating the use of ChatGPT…Analysing the impact of ChatGPT in research (2024)Analysing the impact of ChatG…‘ AI ‐navigating’ or ‘ AI ‐sinking’? An analysis of verbs in research articles titles suspicious of containing AI ‐generated/assisted content (2024)‘ AI ‐navigating’ or ‘ AI ‐si…Is ChatGPT‐4 Accurate in Proofread a Manuscript in Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery? (2023)Is ChatGPT‐4 Accurate in Proo…Comparing scientific abstracts generated by ChatGPT to real abstracts with detectors and blinded human reviewers (2023)Comparing scientific abstract…Artificial intelligence to support publishing and peer review: A summary and review (2023)Artificial intelligence to su…Abstracts written by ChatGPT fool scientists (2023)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)The Global Burden of Journal Peer Review in the Biomedical Literature: Strong Imbalance in the Collective Enterprise (2016)ChatGPT and a new academic reality: Artificial Intelligence‐written research papers and the ethics of the large language models in scholarly publishing (2023)Fighting reviewer fatigue or amplifying bias? Considerations and recommendations for use of ChatGPT and other large language models in scholarly peer review (2023)Inteligencia artificial, investigación y revisión por pares: escenarios futuros y estrategias de acción (2023)Exploring the Impact of Generative AI on Peer Review: Insights from Journal Reviewers (2025)When and how to disclose AI use in academic publishing: AMEE Guide No.192 (2025)Reasons for Rejection of Manuscripts Submitted to AJR by International Authors (2007)Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: learning, teaching, assessment (2009)AI-generated text in otolaryngology publications: a comparative analysis before and after the release of ChatGPT. (2024)Syntactic Structures (1957)The fickle P value generates irreproducible results (2015)“ChatGPT 4.0 Ghosted Us While Conducting Literature Search:” Modeling the Chatbot’s Generated Non-Existent References Using Regression Analysis (2024)An investigation of college students’ acceptance of AI-assisted reading tools: An expansion of the TAM and SDT (2025)Negotiating identity in the age of ChatGPT: non-native English researchers’ experiences with AI-assisted academic writing (2025)Papers and patents are becoming less disruptive over time (2023)Evaluating dental AI research papers: Key considerations for editors and reviewers (2025)Exploring the change in scientific readability following the release of ChatGPT (2025)Fabrication and errors in the bibliographic citations generated by ChatGPT (2023)The use of artificial intelligence (AI) in research: a review of author guidelines in leading journals across eight social science disciplines (2025)ChatGPT listed as author on research papers: many scientists disapprove (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)Artificial Intelligence, Algorithmic Pricing, and Collusion (2020)How to conduct a bibliometric analysis: An overview and guidelines (2021)The impact of ChatGPT feedback on the development of EFL students’ writing skills (2024)Artificial Intelligence in Peer Review: Enhancing Efficiency While Preserving Integrity (2025)Artificial intelligence-assisted academic writing: recommendations for ethical use (2025)
this work references cited by second hop

References

  • 2023Comparing scientific abstracts generated by ChatGPT to real abstracts with detectors and blinded human reviewers1,097 cited
  • 2024Using artificial intelligence in academic writing and research: An essential productivity tool574 cited
  • 2023Artificial intelligence to support publishing and peer review: A summary and review160 cited
  • 2024Analysing the impact of ChatGPT in research46 cited
  • 2023Is ChatGPT‐4 Accurate in Proofread a Manuscript in Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery?28 cited
  • 2024Estimating the use of ChatGPT in dental research publications26 cited
  • 2024How is ChatGPT acknowledged in academic publications?23 cited
  • 2025The adoption of Large Language Models in economics research10 cited
  • 2024‘ AI ‐navigating’ or ‘ AI ‐sinking’? An analysis of verbs in research articles titles suspicious of containing AI ‐generated/assisted content9 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