AI | Sciety

Showing page 1 of 1 pages of list content

A Systematic Review of ChatGPT and Other Conversational Large Language Models in Healthcare

This article has 8 authors:
1. Leyao Wang
2. Zhiyu Wan
3. Congning Ni
4. Qingyuan Song
5. Yang Li
6. Ellen Wright Clayton
7. Bradley A. Malin
8. Zhijun Yin
This article has no evaluationsAppears in 1 listLatest version Apr 27, 2024
Poisoning scientific knowledge using large language models

This article has 9 authors:
1. Junwei Yang
2. Hanwen Xu
3. Srbuhi Mirzoyan
4. Tong Chen
5. Zixuan Liu
6. Wei Ju
7. Luchen Liu
8. Ming Zhang
9. Sheng Wang
This article has no evaluationsAppears in 1 listLatest version Nov 10, 2023
Machine Learning for Hypothesis Generation in Biology and Medicine: Exploring the latent space of neuroscience and developmental bioelectricity

This article has 6 authors:
1. Thomas O'Brien
2. Joel Stremmel
3. Léo Pio-Lopez
4. Patrick McMillen
5. Cody Rasmussen-Ivey
6. Michael Levin
This article has no evaluationsAppears in 1 listLatest version Sep 10, 2023
Mark Williams

I came across this in a post from the ResearchHub community on Discord. From what I understand, the tool https://www.levinlab.dev/fieldshift uses GPT-4 to generate hypotheses from existing research to help researchers identify possible new experiments in different fields.
Assessing ChatGPT’s Mastery of Bloom’s Taxonomy Using Psychosomatic Medicine Exam Questions: Mixed-Methods Study

This article has 8 authors:
1. Anne Herrmann-Werner
2. Teresa Festl-Wietek
3. Friederike Holderried
4. Lea Herschbach
5. Jan Griewatz
6. Ken Masters
7. Stephan Zipfel
8. Moritz Mahling
This article has no evaluationsAppears in 1 listLatest version Jan 23, 2024
Utilizing ChatGPT to select literature for meta-analysis shows workload reduction while maintaining a similar recall level as manual curation

This article has 7 authors:
1. Xiangming Cai
2. Yuanming Geng
3. Yiming Du
4. Bart Westerman
5. Duolao Wang
6. Chiyuan Ma
7. Juan J. Garcia Vallejo
This article has no evaluationsAppears in 1 listLatest version Jan 9, 2025
Reply to Dages et al: You AIn’t using it right—artificial intelligence progress in allergy

This article has 1 author:
1. Dylan Lawless
This article has no evaluationsAppears in 1 listLatest version Jan 1, 2024
Harnessing the open access version of ChatGPT for enhanced clinical opinions

This article has 3 authors:
1. Zachary M. Tenner
2. Michael C. Cottone
3. Martin R. Chavez
This article has no evaluationsAppears in 1 listLatest version Feb 5, 2024
From Answers to Insights: Unveiling the Strengths and Limitations of ChatGPT and Biomedical Knowledge Graphs

This article has 6 authors:
1. Yu Hou
2. Jeremy Yeung
3. Hua Xu
4. Chang Su
5. Fei Wang
6. Rui Zhang
This article has no evaluationsAppears in 1 listLatest version Aug 1, 2023
Attitudes and Perceptions of Medical Researchers Towards the Use of Artificial Intelligence Chatbots in the Scientific Process: A Protocol for a Cross-Sectional Survey

This article has 6 authors:
1. Jeremy Y. Ng
2. Sharleen G. Maduranayagam
3. Cynthia Lokker
4. Alfonso Iorio
5. R. Brian Haynes
6. David Moher
This article has no evaluationsAppears in 1 listLatest version Jul 27, 2023
Artificial Intelligence in Biomedicine: Systematic Review

This article has 1 author:
1. Irene S. Gabashvili
This article has no evaluationsAppears in 1 listLatest version Jul 24, 2023
A publishing infrastructure for AI-assisted academic authoring

This article has 2 authors:
1. Milton Pividori
2. Casey S. Greene
This article has no evaluationsAppears in 1 listLatest version Jan 23, 2023
Too bad to be fraud, Midjourney has yet to embark in science

This article has 1 author:
1. Michael Cammer
This article has no evaluationsAppears in 1 listLatest version Jan 30, 2023
ChatGPT identifies gender disparities in scientific peer review

This article has 1 author:
1. Jeroen PH Verharen
This article has been curated by 1 group:
- Curated by eLife
  
  eLife assessment
  
  This study used ChatGPT to assess certain linguistic characteristics (sentiment and politeness) of 500 peer reviews for 200 neuroscience papers published in Nature Communications. The vast majority of reviews were polite, but papers with female first authors received less polite reviews than papers with male first authors, whereas papers with a female senior author received more favourable reviews than papers with a male senior author. Overall, the study is an important contribution to work on gender bias, and the evidence for the potential utility of generative AI programs like ChatGPT in meta-research is solid.
Reviewed by eLife

This article has 8 evaluationsAppears in 3 listsLatest version Nov 3, 2023Latest activity Oct 3, 2023
ChatGPT applications in Academic Research: A Review of Benefits, Concerns, and Recommendations

This article has 5 authors:
1. Adhari AlZaabi
2. Amira ALAmri
3. Halima Albalushi
4. Ruqaya Aljabri
5. AbdulRahman AalAbdulsalam
This article has no evaluationsAppears in 1 listLatest version Aug 18, 2023

Curated by eLife