Will a Biology paper containing false data generated by a LLM tool be published in an accredited journal in 2024?

Plus

Ṁ4328

in a day

40%

chance

ALL

LLM assistants and similar tools are notorious for outputting bad data and false citations ("hallucinating"). There has already been a highly public case of this leading to legal malpractice (https://www.nytimes.com/2023/05/27/nyregion/avianca-airline-lawsuit-chatgpt.html). Will we see a similar case or cases in the arena of Biology during 2024?

Clarification 1 (01/01/2024): I'll be considering all journals with an average impact factor >10 for the last 10 years (2024 inclusive), where those journals self-describe as being primarily concerned with the field of Biology. Hope that's helpful!

This question is managed and resolved by Manifold.

Get

1,000

and

3.00

9 Comments

48 Holders

90 Trades

Sort by:

Can you share the list of journals you are considering?

bought Ṁ40 YES

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2468023024002402 this gives me hope (ctrl+f for "Certainly"

Too bad this one doesn't count https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fcell.2023.1339390/full

This resolves to YES even if the false data is included by accident, correct? No bad intent necessary?

@AndrewBrown that's right, as in the example case included.

I've already seen it in predatory journals, so to me this hinges on the technicality of what an accredited journal is.

i think bettors would benefit from more clarity on what you will consider an accredited journal.

@CamillePerrin I'll be considering all journals with an average impact factor >10 for the last 10 years (2024 inclusive), where those journals self-describe as being primarily concerned with the field of Biology. Hope that's helpful!

I will also not be considering any articles published before 2024.

@CellVendetta A IF of gt 10 is quite high, is it not?

Related questions

Related questions