# Where there's a will there's a way: ChatGPT is used more for science in countries where it is prohibited

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2406.11583 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.11583/

## Key facts

- Cited by 6 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- First posted on arXiv 17 Jun 2024.

## Built on by (most cited first, 6 of 6)

- [Scientific production in the era of Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2601.13187/) (2026)
- [The Impact of Large Language Models in Academia: from Writing to Speaking](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2409.13686/) (2024)
- [LLM hallucinations in the wild: Large-scale evidence from non-existent citations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2605.07723/) (2026)
- [Most biomedical publications show signs of LLM-assisted writing](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2608.10715/) (2026)
- [The Rise of Large Language Models and the Direction and Impact of US Federal Research Funding](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2601.15485/) (2026)
- [Human-AI Collaboration in Science at Scale: A Global Large-scale Randomized Field Experiment](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2605.24180/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Regulating AI is a key societal challenge, but which regulation methods are effective is unclear. This study measures the effectiveness of restricting AI services geographically, focusing on ChatGPT. OpenAI restricts ChatGPT access in several countries, including China and Russia. If restrictions are effective, ChatGPT use should be minimal in these countries. We measured use with a classifier based on distinctive word usage found in early versions of ChatGPT, e.g. "delve." We trained the classifier on pre- and post-ChatGPT "polished" abstracts and found it outperformed GPTZero and ZeroGPT on validation sets, including papers with self-reported AI use. Applying the classifier to preprints from Arxiv, BioRxiv, and MedRxiv showed ChatGPT was used in about 12.6% of preprints by August 2023, with 7.7% higher usage in restricted countries. The gap appeared before China's first major legal LLM became widely available. To test the possibility that, due to high demand, use in restricted countries would have been even higher without restrictions, we compared Asian countries with high expected demand (where English is not an official language) and found that use was higher in those with restrictions. ChatGPT use was correlated with higher views and downloads, but not citations or journal placement. Overall, restricting ChatGPT geographically has proven ineffective in science and possibly other domains, likely due to widespread workarounds.