marketrent OP t1_j5yeb4p wrote on January 26, 2023 at 12:47 PM

James Vincent, 26 Jan. 2023, The Verge (Vox Media)

Excerpt:

>“We felt compelled to clarify our position: for our authors, for our editors, and for ourselves,” Magdalena Skipper, editor-in-chief of Springer Nature’s flagship publication, Nature, tells The Verge.

>“This new generation of LLM tools — including ChatGPT — has really exploded into the community, which is rightly excited and playing with them, but [also] using them in ways that go beyond how they can genuinely be used at present.”

>The company announced this week that software like ChatGPT can’t be credited as an author in papers published in its thousands of journals.

>Arguments against giving AI authorship is that software simply can’t fulfill the required duties, as Skipper and Nature Springer explain.

>“When we think of authorship of scientific papers, of research papers, we don’t just think about writing them,” says Skipper.

>“There are responsibilities that extend beyond publication, and certainly at the moment these AI tools are not capable of assuming those responsibilities.”

>Software cannot be meaningfully accountable for a publication, it cannot claim intellectual property rights for its work, and cannot correspond with other scientists and with the press to explain and answer questions on its work.

>ChatGPT and earlier large language models (LLMs) have already been named as authors in a small number of published papers, pre-prints, and scientific articles.