AI-Generated or Human-Written? - Detecting non-human authorship in medical student papers: Controlled Trial (Preprint)

Author:

Doru BerinORCID,Maier ChristophORCID,Busse Johanna SophieORCID,Lücke ThomasORCID,Schönhoff JudithORCID,Enax Krumova ElenaORCID,Berger MariaORCID,Tokic MarianneORCID

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Large Language Models (LLMs), exemplified by ChatGPT, have reached a level of sophistication where distinguishing between human and AI-generated texts is challenging.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the implications for medical texts, the aim of this experimental study was to investigate the ability of two blinded expert groups, one medical and one humanistic, to differentiate between texts written by medical students and those generated by ChatGPT.

METHODS

The medical experts (n=22) were characterised by content familiarity and the humanities experts (n=13) by linguistic and formal textual analysis expertise. All experts were presented with two pairs of texts on two dif-ferent topics, each pair similar in content and structure - one text written by a medical student and the other generated by ChatGPT. They were requested to identify the texts as human-generated or AI-generated and to reason their decision. They were also requested to rate some characteristics of a text: linguistic quality, style, logical coherence, scientific quality, recognition of knowledge limitations, formulation of future research questions, and spelling and grammatical errors.

RESULTS

About 70% of all participants correctly identified the text written by ChatGPT. No significant difference was found between the two groups in terms of correct identification. Only 14% of participants misidentified the author in both text pairs. Familiarity with the content did not play a major role, but certain features of the writ-ing style were more important in the decision-making process. In particular, characteristics in the linguistic categories of redundancy, repetition, and thread/coherence proved to be decisive for the acceptance of a ChatGPT text.

CONCLUSIONS

Authoring style and personal writing features should further be investigated, especially in view of the major change in academic writing emerging by the presence of LLMs.

CLINICALTRIAL

The project was submitted to the ethics committee of the Ruhr University Bochum, Germany, in April 2023. As this is not a clinical trial on human subjects, no study or trial registration was required.

Publisher

JMIR Publications Inc.

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3