The cost of reviewing scientific publications, both in terms of money and time spent, is growing to unmanageable proportions with current methods. It is necessary to use AI as a trust system and thus free up human resources for research tasks. It would be important for SciELO to progressively incorporate AI modules for evaluation in its preprints server as a new advance and development of the technologies it manages. Available in Spanish only. … Read More →
The scientific community is publishing (much) more and that’s a problem
A study posted on arXiv reports an exponential increase in the number of refereed scientific articles published in recent years, disproportionately outstripping the increase in the number of researchers. Scientific output per researcher as author, reviewer, and editor has increased dramatically, a phenomenon referred to as “pressure on scientific publication”, classified as a problem to be identified and resolved. Available in Portuguese only. … Read More →
Research and scholarly communication, AI, and the upcoming legislation
Can AI be used to generate terrorist “papers”, spread deadly viruses, or learn how to make nuclear bombs at home? Is there legislation that can protect us? It looks like international regulation is on the way. … Read More →
ChatGPT and other AIs will transform all scientific research: initial reflections on uses and consequences – part 2
In this second part of the essay, we seek to present some risks that arise particularly in the use of generative AI in the scientific field and in academic work. Although all the problems have not been fully mapped out, we have tried to offer initial reflections to support and encourage debate. … Read More →
ChatGPT and other AIs will transform all scientific research: initial thoughts on uses and consequences – part 1
We discuss some possible consequences, risks, and paradoxes of the use of AIs in research, such as potential deterioration of research integrity, possible changes in the dynamics of knowledge production and center-periphery relations in the academic environment. We concluded by calling for an in-depth dialog on regulation and the creation of technologies adapted to our needs. … Read More →
Artificial Intelligence and research communication
Are chatbots really authors of scientific articles? Can they be legally responsible, make ethical decisions? What do scientific societies, journal editors and universities say? Can their results be included in original scientific articles? Based on recent contributions hereby presented, we’ll be publishing posts that will try to answer these questions and any new ones that arise. … Read More →
GPT, machine translation, and how good they are: a comprehensive evaluation
Generative artificial intelligence models have demonstrated remarkable capabilities for natural language generation, but their performance for machine translation has not been thoroughly investigated. A comprehensive evaluation of GPT models for translation is presented, compared to state-of-the-art commercial and research systems, including NMT, tested with texts in 18 languages. … Read More →
Uncited articles and the dispersion of citations in the scientific literature
Questioning Bradford’s law, whose interpretation in bibliometrics states that most citations are concentrated in a few journals and articles, a recent study highlights the importance of uncited articles and their influence on citation concentration. For the authors, uncited articles should be included in the analysis to provide a more comprehensive understanding of citation patterns across time, disciplines, and geographic regions. … Read More →
Reproduction and replication in scientific research – part 3
Reproducibility and replicability are central issues when discussing the reliability of scientific research. The attempt by a second researcher to replicate a previous study is an effort to determine whether applying the same methods to the same scientific question produces similar results. In the social sciences and humanities, however, it is not the same paradigms. … Read More →
Reproduction and replication in scientific research – part 2
In this second note on the subject, we will address the guidelines proposed in 2019 by NASEM. We will analyze how replicability is understood in different scientific disciplines, mainly in the experimental sciences, based on a computational paradigm. Likewise, we will look at opinions from other disciplines related to social sciences and medicine, which do not participate in the same epistemological paradigms. … Read More →
Reproduction and replication in scientific research – part 1
Replicability is a central issue when discussing the reliability of scientific research that renews itself in the promotion of open science. A second researcher’s attempt to replicate an earlier study is an effort to determine whether applying the same methods to the same scientific question yields similar results. … Read More →
Mapping output in content analysis in SciELO Brazil indicates a technique that is caught in a time warp
A scientometric review on the use of content analysis in SciELO Brasil showed a notable concentration of citations from Laurence Bardin’s manual, whose use continues to grow. As the work has not had updates in the last two decades, we can say that the use of the technique may be caught in a time warp. … Read More →
It takes a body to understand the world – why ChatGPT and other language AIs don’t know what they’re saying [Originally published in The Conversation in April/2023]
Large language models can’t understand language the way humans do because they can’t perceive and make sense of the world. … Read More →
Rethink peer review to make it sustainable
A recently published article discusses the need for a profound overhaul of peer review, as the current model proves to be no longer sustainable. Journal editors have difficulties finding reviewers willing to evaluate submitted articles, researchers discuss greater recognition or even remuneration to act as reviewers. Among the numerous proposed alternatives, the opening of peer review is presented as the most feasible alternative. … Read More →
Preprint review should be part of doctoral and postdoctoral training programs
Considering the significant growth of preprints in scholarly communication, as well as the emergence of preprint servers in all areas of knowledge, Richard Sever, assistant director of CSHL Press, proposes that (post-publication) evaluation of preprints be used to complement doctoral and postdoctoral training at academic institutions. … Read More →
Recent Comments