References
- Alexi, A., Lazebnik, T., & Rosenfeld, A. (2024). The scientometrics and reciprocality underlying co-authorship panels in Google Scholar profiles. Scientometrics, 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-024-05026-y
- Bhattacharjee, A., Kumarage, T., Moraffah, R., & Liu, H. (2023). Conda: Contrastive domain adaptation for AI-generated text detection. In Proceedings of the 13th International Joint Conference on Natural Language Processing and the 3rd Conference of the Asia-Pacific Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics (pp. 598–610). Association for Computational Linguistics.
- Bin-Nashwan, S. A., Sadallah, M., & Bouteraa, M. (2023). Use of ChatGPT in academia: Academic integrity hangs in the balance. Technology in Society, 75, 102370.
- Dergaa, I., Chamari, K., Zmijewski, P., & Ben Saad, H. (2023). From human writing to artificial intelligence generated text: Examining the prospects and potential threats of ChatGPT in academic writing. Biology of Sport, 40(2), 615–622.
- Draxler, F., Werner, A., Lehmann, F., Hoppe, M., Schmidt, A., Buschek, D., & Welsch, R. (2023). The AI ghostwriter effect: When users do not perceive ownership of AI-generated text but self-declare as authors. arXiv:2303.03283
- Editorial. (2023). Tools such as ChatGPT threaten transparent science; here are our ground rules for their use. Nature, 613.
- Lazebnik, T., & Rosenfeld, A. (2023). A computational model for individual scholars’ writing style dynamics. arXiv:2305.04900
- Lund, B. D., & Wang, T. (2023). Chatting about ChatGPT: How may AI and GPT impact academia and libraries? Library Hi Tech News, 40(3), 26–29.
- Sallam, M. (2023). ChatGPT utility in healthcare education, research, and practice: Systematic review on the promising perspectives and valid concerns. Healthcare, 11(6), 887.
- Seßler, K., Xiang, T., Bogenrieder, L., & Kasneci, E. (2023). Peer: Empowering writing with large language models. In O. Viberg, I. Jivet, P. Muñoz-Merino, M. Perifanou, & T. Papathoma (Eds.), Responsive and sustainable educational futures (pp. 755–761). Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 14200. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-42682-7_73
- Semrl, N., Feigl, S., Taumberger, N., Bracic, T., Fluhr, H., Blockeel, C., & Kollmann, M. (2023). AI language models in human reproduction research: Exploring ChatGPT’s potential to assist academic writing. Human Reproduction, 38(12), 2281–2288.
- Sikes, P. (2009). Will the real author come forward? Questions of ethics, plagiarism, theft and collusion in academic research writing. International Journal of Research & Method in Education, 32(1), 13–24.
- Su, J., Zhuo, T. Y., Wang, D., & Nakov, P. (2023). DetectLLM: Leveraging log rank information for zero-shot detection of machine-generated text. arXiv:2306.05540
- Tang, R., Chuang, Y.-N., & Hu, X. (2023). The science of detecting LLM-generated texts. arXiv:2303.07205
- Wu, K., Pang, L., Shen, H., Cheng, X., & Chua, T.-S. (2023). LLMDet: A third party large language models generated text detection tool. In H. Bouamor, J. Pino, & K. Bali (Eds.), Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: EMNLP 2023 (pp. 2113–2133). Association for Computational Linguistics.
- Yuan, A., Coenen, A., Reif, E., & Ippolito, D. (2022). Wordcraft: Story writing with large language models. In Proceedings of the 27th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces (IUI ′22). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 841–852. https://doi.org/10.1145/3490099.3511105
- Zargari, H., Rosenfeld, A., & Elmalech, A. (2023). Online self-presentation: Examining gender differences in academic scholars’ personal web-pages. In Proceedings of iConference 2023.