You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments View context
19 points

If they really want to do it, they can just run a local language model trained to proofread stuff like this. Would be way better

permalink
report
parent
reply
12 points

This is exactly the line of thinking that lead to papers like this being generated.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

I don’t think so. They are using AI from a 3rd party. If they train their own specialized version, things will be better.

permalink
report
parent
reply
11 points

Here is a better idea: have some academic integrity and actually do the work instead of using incompetent machine learning to flood the industry with inaccurate trash papers whose only real impact is getting in the way of real research.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

That’s not necessarily true. General-purpose 3rd party models (chatgpt, llama3-70b, etc) perform surprisingly good in very specific tasks. While training or finetuning your specialized model should indeed give you better results, the crazy amount of computational resources and specialized manpower needed to accomplish it makes it unfeasible and unpractical in many applications. If you can get away with an occational “as an AI model…”, you are better off using existing models.

permalink
report
parent
reply

Science Memes

!science_memes@mander.xyz

Create post

Welcome to c/science_memes @ Mander.xyz!

A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.



Rules

  1. Don’t throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
  2. Keep it rooted (on topic).
  3. No spam.
  4. Infographics welcome, get schooled.

This is a science community. We use the Dawkins definition of meme.



Research Committee

Other Mander Communities

Science and Research

Biology and Life Sciences

Physical Sciences

Humanities and Social Sciences

Practical and Applied Sciences

Memes

Miscellaneous

Community stats

  • 13K

    Monthly active users

  • 3.4K

    Posts

  • 84K

    Comments