Re:AI tools are spotting errors in research papers: inside a...
by mmooss on Sunday March 09, 2025 @01:27AM
(#43306758)
I agree it should be part of the composition and review processes.
> It could massively raise the quality level of a lot of papers.
Is there an indication that the difference is 'massive'? For example, reading the OP, it wasn't clear to me how significant these errors are. For example, maybe they are simple factual errors such as the wrong year on a citation.
> They can easily dismiss false positives
That may not be the case - it is possible that the error reports may not be worthwhile. Based on the OP's reporting on accuracy, it doesn't seem like that's the case, but it could vary by field, type of content (quantitative, etc.), etc.
> It could massively raise the quality level of a lot of papers.
Is there an indication that the difference is 'massive'? For example, reading the OP, it wasn't clear to me how significant these errors are. For example, maybe they are simple factual errors such as the wrong year on a citation.
> They can easily dismiss false positives
That may not be the case - it is possible that the error reports may not be worthwhile. Based on the OP's reporting on accuracy, it doesn't seem like that's the case, but it could vary by field, type of content (quantitative, etc.), etc.