The current and predominant school of thought in academic publishing, with a correspondingly rigorously implemented set of ethical policies, notes that classic authorship is a purely human endeavor. However, such rigid conceptual restrictions on authorship for artificial intelligence (AI), like large language models (LLMs), may be borne from fear, emerging perhaps from being intellectually threatened by AI/LLMs that might outperform humans. In this paper, considering several caveats, a world of academic publishing in which AI/LLMs are offered a fair opportunity of authorship, coined AI-authorship, is envisioned.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Jaime A. Teixeira da Silva (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: