mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Towards the relationship between AIGC in manuscript writing and author profiles: evidence from preprints in LLMs

arXiv 2404.15799 ↗First posted 24 Apr 2024cs.DLcited by 14

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

AIGC tools such as ChatGPT have profoundly changed scientific research, leading to widespread attention on its use on academic writing. Leveraging preprints from large language models, this study examined the use of AIGC in manuscript writing and its correlation with author profiles. We found that: (1) since the release of ChatGPT, the likelihood of abstracts being AI-generated has gradually increased; (2) scientists from English-speaking countries are less likely to use AIGC tools for writing assistance, while those from countries with linguistic differences from English are more likely to use these tools; (3) there is weak correlation between a paper's AI-generated probability and authors' academic performance; and (4) authors who have previously published papers with high AI-generated probabilities are more likely to continue using AIGC tools. We believe that this paper provides insightful results for relevant policies and norms and in enhancing the understanding of the relationship between humans and AI.

Key facts. Cited by 14 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 24 Apr 2024.

Builds on

No reference list yet.

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2024: 4; 2025: 5; 2026: 5.

14 papers.

Sort:

By area: