Dies ist eine Übersichtsseite mit Metadaten zu dieser wissenschaftlichen Arbeit. Der vollständige Artikel ist beim Verlag verfügbar.
Штучний інтелект і академічна доброчесність: запитання без відповідей
0
Zitationen
2
Autoren
2025
Jahr
Abstract
This study examines how leading international academic publishers have developed and evolved their policies regarding AI use in scholarly publishing. Researchers analyzed websites of five major academic publishers (identified through AI consultation) to investigate their approaches to AI regulation. The study conducted two analyses separated by two years to track the evolution of policy on AI use. The results showed that all publishers agreed that AI should never generate text published under human authorship, essentially contradicting generative AI's primary designed purpose. A comparative analysis revealed fundamental shifts in publisher approaches. Publishers developed detailed guidelines for authors, reviewers, and editors on how to use and check AI in research. The research demonstrates that publisher policies cannot be formulated due to AI's rapid evolution. Constant policy review and adaptation are necessary as technology capabilities continue expanding. Despite policy evolution, AI tools cannot serve as article authors or receive authorship credit. It maintains human accountability in scholarly attribution and publishing standards. The study emphasizes that technological detection methods alone cannot address fundamental integrity issues. No software can replace the moral responsibility and ethical awareness that researchers must personally follow. The research concludes that AI tools like ChatGPT should function as research aids rather than manuscript substitutes. The future of academic integrity depends on balancing technological assistance with human responsibility, ethical awareness, and continuous policy adaptation in scholarly work. Key words: artificial intelligence, academic integrity, confidentiality, publishing policy, ethical norms.
Ähnliche Arbeiten
Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI): Concepts, taxonomies, opportunities and challenges toward responsible AI
2019 · 8.287 Zit.
Stop explaining black box machine learning models for high stakes decisions and use interpretable models instead
2019 · 8.140 Zit.
High-performance medicine: the convergence of human and artificial intelligence
2018 · 7.534 Zit.
Proceedings of the 19th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence
2005 · 5.776 Zit.
Peeking Inside the Black-Box: A Survey on Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)
2018 · 5.450 Zit.