Quantifying the Increasing Use of Large Language Models in Scientific Papers Across Disciplines

Core Concepts

The use of large language models (LLMs) like ChatGPT in academic writing has steadily increased, with the fastest growth observed in Computer Science papers, reaching up to 17.5% of sentences modified by LLMs by February 2024.

Abstract

The study conducts a systematic, large-scale analysis to quantify the prevalence of LLM-modified content across 950,965 papers published between January 2020 and February 2024 on arXiv, bioRxiv, and Nature portfolio journals.
Key findings:

The largest and fastest growth in LLM usage was observed in Computer Science papers, reaching 17.5% of sentences modified by LLMs in abstracts and 15.3% in introductions by February 2024.
In contrast, Mathematics papers and the Nature portfolio showed the least increase, with up to 4.9% and 6.3% of sentences modified in abstracts, and 3.5% and 6.4% in introductions, respectively.
Papers whose first authors post more preprints tend to have a higher fraction of LLM-modified content.
Papers in more crowded research areas, where papers are more similar to each other, show higher LLM modification compared to less crowded areas.
Shorter papers consistently show higher LLM modification compared to longer papers, potentially indicating that researchers under time constraints are more likely to rely on AI writing assistance.
The findings suggest that LLMs are being broadly used in scientific writing, with potential implications for the integrity and independence of the scientific publishing ecosystem.

Stats

The fraction of LLM-modified sentences in Computer Science abstracts reached 17.5% by February 2024.
The fraction of LLM-modified sentences in Mathematics abstracts reached 4.9% by February 2024.
The fraction of LLM-modified sentences in the Nature portfolio abstracts reached 6.3% by February 2024.
Papers whose first authors post 3 or more preprints had an estimated 19.3% of sentences modified by LLMs in their abstracts, compared to 15.6% for papers with 2 or fewer preprints.
Papers more similar to their closest peer had an estimated 22.2% of sentences modified by LLMs in their abstracts, compared to 14.7% for papers less similar to their closest peer.
Shorter papers (below 5,000 words) had an estimated 17.7% of sentences modified by LLMs in their abstracts, compared to 13.6% for longer papers.

Quotes

"The largest and fastest growth was observed in Computer Science papers, with α reaching 17.5% for abstracts and 15.3% for introductions by February 2024."
"In contrast, Mathematics papers and the Nature portfolio showed the least increase, with α reaching 4.9% and 6.3% for abstracts and 3.5% and 6.4% for introductions, respectively."
"Papers whose first authors post more preprints tend to have a higher fraction of LLM-modified content."
"Papers in more crowded research areas, where papers tend to be more similar, showed higher LLM-modification compared to those in less crowded areas."
"Shorter papers consistently showed higher LLM-modification compared to longer papers."

Key Insights Distilled From

Mapping the Increasing Use of LLMs in Scientific Papers

by Weixin Liang... at arxiv.org 04-02-2024

https://arxiv.org/pdf/2404.01268.pdf

Deeper Inquiries

How might the increasing use of LLMs in scientific writing impact the quality, reproducibility, and diversity of research findings?

The increasing use of Large Language Models (LLMs) in scientific writing can have both positive and negative impacts on the quality, reproducibility, and diversity of research findings.
Quality:

Positive Impact: LLMs can assist researchers in generating well-written and coherent manuscripts, improving the overall readability and clarity of scientific papers.
Negative Impact: There is a risk of compromising the quality of research if LLMs are used to generate content without proper understanding or oversight, leading to inaccuracies, misleading information, or plagiarism.
Reproducibility:

Positive Impact: LLMs can aid in standardizing writing styles and formats, making it easier for researchers to reproduce and replicate experiments based on clear and consistent descriptions.
Negative Impact: Overreliance on LLMs may result in a lack of transparency regarding the origin of the content, making it challenging to verify the authenticity and reproducibility of the research.
Diversity:

Positive Impact: LLMs can help researchers from diverse linguistic backgrounds communicate their findings effectively, promoting inclusivity and accessibility in scientific publishing.
Negative Impact: If not used thoughtfully, LLMs may homogenize writing styles and reduce the diversity of voices in academic literature, potentially marginalizing unique perspectives and insights.
In summary, while LLMs offer valuable support in scientific writing, it is crucial for researchers to use them judiciously to maintain the quality, reproducibility, and diversity of research findings.

How can academic institutions and publishers effectively monitor and regulate the use of LLMs in the scientific publishing process to maintain the integrity of scholarly communication?

To ensure the integrity of scholarly communication amidst the increasing use of LLMs in scientific writing, academic institutions and publishers can implement the following strategies:

Guidelines and Policies:

Establish clear guidelines on the ethical use of LLMs in research writing.
Develop policies that outline acceptable practices and the consequences of misuse.

Training and Education:

Provide training on responsible LLM usage and plagiarism detection tools.
Educate researchers on the importance of maintaining academic integrity.

Peer Review and Detection Tools:

Incorporate AI-powered tools to detect LLM-generated content in submissions.
Enhance peer review processes to identify and address potential instances of LLM misuse.

Transparency and Attribution:

Require authors to disclose the use of LLMs in their manuscripts.
Ensure proper attribution of AI-generated content to maintain transparency.

Collaboration and Oversight:

Foster collaboration between researchers, publishers, and AI experts to address emerging challenges.
Establish oversight committees to monitor LLM usage and enforce compliance with guidelines.

By implementing these measures, academic institutions and publishers can effectively monitor and regulate the use of LLMs, safeguarding the integrity of scholarly communication in the era of AI-assisted writing.

What ethical considerations should be taken into account as LLM-assisted writing becomes more prevalent in academia?

As LLM-assisted writing becomes more prevalent in academia, several ethical considerations must be addressed to uphold academic integrity and ethical standards:

Authorship and Attribution:

Ensure proper attribution of AI-generated content to maintain transparency and academic honesty.
Clarify authorship guidelines to account for contributions made by LLMs in research papers.

Plagiarism and Originality:

Educate researchers on the ethical use of LLMs to prevent plagiarism and uphold standards of originality.
Implement plagiarism detection tools to identify and address instances of content duplication.

Bias and Fairness:

Address biases inherent in LLMs to prevent the propagation of discriminatory language or viewpoints.
Promote diversity and inclusivity in research by considering the impact of AI-generated content on marginalized groups.

Data Privacy and Security:

Safeguard sensitive data used to train LLMs and ensure compliance with data protection regulations.
Protect the privacy of individuals whose data may be inadvertently included in AI-generated text.

Accountability and Oversight:

Establish mechanisms for accountability and oversight to monitor the ethical use of LLMs in academic writing.
Encourage transparency and open dialogue on the ethical implications of AI technologies in research.

By addressing these ethical considerations proactively, academia can navigate the ethical challenges posed by the increasing prevalence of LLM-assisted writing and uphold the principles of academic integrity and ethical conduct.