Will a Biology paper containing false data generated by a LLM tool be published in an accredited journal in 2024?
Standard
50
Ṁ4103
Dec 31
50%
chance

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!

Get
Ṁ1,000
and
S1.00
Sort by:

Can you share the list of journals you are considering?

bought Ṁ40 YES

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.