Chatting about ChatGPT: how may AI and GPT impact academia and libraries?

Abstract

Purpose This paper aims to provide an overview of key definitions related to ChatGPT, a public tool developed by OpenAI, and its underlying technology, Generative Pretrained Transformer (GPT). Design/methodology/approach This paper includes an interview with ChatGPT on its potential impact on academia and libraries. The interview discusses the benefits of ChatGPT such as improving search and discovery, reference and information services; cataloging and metadata generation; and content creation, as well as the ethical considerations that need to be taken into account, such as privacy and bias. Findings ChatGPT has considerable power to advance academia and librarianship in both anxiety-provoking and exciting new ways. However, it is important to consider how to use this technology responsibly and ethically, and to uncover how we, as professionals, can work alongside this technology to improve our work, rather than to abuse it or allow it to abuse us in the race to create new scholarly knowledge and educate future professionals. Originality/value This paper discusses the history and technology of GPT, including its generative pretrained transformer model, its ability to perform a wide range of language-based tasks and how ChatGPT uses this technology to function as a sophisticated chatbot.

ChatGPT Utility in Healthcare Education, Research, and Practice: Systematic Review on the Promising Perspectives and Valid Concerns

“…ChatGPT, as an example of other LLMs, can be described as a promising or even a revolutionary tool for scientific research in both academic writing and in the research process itself. Specifically, ChatGPT was listed in several sources as an efficient and promising tool for conducting comprehensive literature reviews and generating computer codes, thereby saving time for the research steps that require more efforts from human intelligence (e.g., the focus on experimental design) [ 14 , 27 , 28 , 41 , 44 , 46 , 47 , 60 , 71 , 72 ]. Additionally, ChatGPT can be helpful in generating queries for comprehensive systematic review with high precision, as shown by Wang et al, despite the authors highlighting the transparency issues and unsuitability for high-recall retrieval [ 61 ].…”

“…First, superficial, inaccurate, or incorrect content was frequently cited as a shortcoming of ChatGPT use in scientific writing [ 14 , 28 , 29 , 40 , 60 ]. The ethical issues including the risk of bias based on training datasets and plagiarism were also frequently mentioned, aside from the lack of transparency regarding content generation, which justifies the description of ChatGPT, on occasions, as a black box technology [ 14 , 25 , 26 , 40 , 44 , 45 , 46 , 47 , 48 , 55 , 60 , 63 , 65 , 72 ]. Importantly, the concept of ChatGPT hallucination could be risky if the generated content is not thoroughly evaluated by researchers and health providers with proper expertise [ 37 , 56 , 73 , 77 , 79 ].…”

ChatGPTand a new academic reality:Artificial Intelligence‐writtenresearch papers and the ethics of the large language models in scholarly publishing

“…ChatGPT can support the dissemination and diffusion of new research ideas through the creation of better metadata, indexing, and summaries of research findings (Lund & Wang, 2023). Assuming there is trust and usability among the public, this may support the diffusion of research findings through the translation of research into lay language that can be understood by members of the general public (Wang et al, 2022).…”

The Utility of ChatGPT as an Example of Large Language Models in Healthcare Education, Research and Practice: Systematic Review on the Future Perspectives and Potential Limitations

“…The following common themes emerged from the available literature: ChatGPT as an example of other LLMs can be a promising or even a revolutionary tool for scientific research both in academic writing and in the research process itself. Specifically, ChatGPT was listed in several sources as an efficient and promising tool for conducting comprehensive literature reviews and generating computer codes, thereby saving time for the research steps that require more efforts from human intelligence (e.g., the focus on experimental design) [14,27,32,33,38,47,55,58,78,79]. Additionally, ChatGPT can be helpful in generating queries for comprehensive systematic review with high precision as shown by Wang et al despite the authors highlighting the transparency issues and unsuitability for high-recall retrieval [23].…”

“…On the other hand, the use of ChatGPT in academic writing and scientific research should be done in light of the following current limitations that could compromise the quality of research: First, superficial, inaccurate or incorrect content was frequently cited as a shortcoming of ChatGPT use [14,47,49,77,79]. The ethical issues including the risk of bias based on training datasets, and plagiarism were frequently mentioned, besides the lack of transparency described on occasions as a black box technology [14,27,[29][30][31][32][33]35,36,39,57,58,77,79]. Importantly, the concept of ChatGPT hallucination was mentioned which can be risky if not evaluated properly by researchers and health providers with proper expertise [59,60,65,73,74].…”