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