BACKGROUND: Recent neural language models have taken a significant step forward in producing remarkably controllable, fluent, and grammatical text. Although some recent works have found that AI-generated text is not distinguishable from human-authored writing for crowd-sourcing workers, there still exist errors in AI-generated text which are even subtler and harder to spot. METHOD: In this paper, we investigate the gap between scientific content generated by AI and written by humans. Specifically, we first adopt several publicly available tools or models to investigate the performance for detecting GPT-generated scientific text. Then we utilize features from writing style to analyze the similarities and differences between the two types of content. Furthermore, more complex and deep perspectives, such as consistency, coherence, language redundancy, and factual errors, are also taken into consideration for in-depth analysis. RESULT: The results suggest that while AI has the potential to generate scientific content that is as accurate as human-written content, there is still a gap in terms of depth and overall quality. AI-generated scientific content is more likely to contain errors in language redundancy and factual issues. CONCLUSION: We find that there exists a ``writing style'' gap between AI-generated scientific text and human-written scientific text. Moreover, based on the analysis result, we summarize a series of model-agnostic or distribution-agnostic features, which could be utilized to unknown or novel domain distribution and different generation methods. Future research should focus on not only improving the capabilities of AI models to produce high-quality content but also examining and addressing ethical and security concerns related to the generation and the use of AI-generated content.
翻译:方法:在本文件中,我们调查了AI产生的科学内容与人类编写的科学内容之间的差距。具体地说,我们首先采用若干公开可用的工具或模型来调查探测GPT产生的科学文本的性能。然后,我们利用从写作风格的特征来分析两种类型内容之间的异同。此外,还考虑到更为复杂和深刻的视角,例如一致性、一致性、语言冗余性和事实错误,以进行深入分析。 成果:结果表明,尽管AI有可能产生与人类编写的内容一样准确的科学内容,但在深度和总体质量方面仍然存在差距。 AI产生的科学内容更有可能包含语言冗余和事实问题中的错误。 CONCLUSION:我们发现,从更复杂和深刻的视角,如一致性、一致性、语言冗余和事实错误等,还考虑到更复杂和深刻的视角,如一致性、一致性、一致性、语言冗余和事实错误。 成果显示,尽管AI有可能产生与人类编写的科学内容,但最终结果只能用于翻译。