Mr Stapleton's knowledge is perfect for helping make a training set for a paper critic agent. The agent can listen to transcripts of this youtube channel and look for and use his advice directly to improve its capabilities. Mimicry is a form of learning. People like Mr Stapleton are suited to contributing to the growth of paper critic AI agents. It would preferably require yet another AI agent to automate the training of a paper critic agent in the next phase (just reading his youtube video transcripts for the purpose of learning his ability to identify known weaknesses in known scientific papers) but before that happens in phase one, humans like him can show good examples and counterexamples manually with good prompt engineering.
It would be interesting to dive just a bit deeper and see if ChatGPT really wrote from the data it was given or whether it sneakily went out and plagiarized results from other papers written from the same data set. As you mentioned, its findings weren't in any way novel. It's at least plausible that it reverse-engineered its paper from others out there.
I would LOVE to see this applied to more complicated systems like in engineering, chemistry, physics, and maybe even mathematics. Unfortunately I don't see this going very far as the datasets get bigger and with more moving parts. We'll have to find ways to consolidate variables, find bridges between various seemingly unrelated concepts, and other ideas that I probably can't even imagine right now.
I wonder if chatbots’ inability to handle citations/references may be related to many journals limit access. If that is the case, with open access publishing becoming more normative, this issue should resolve itself…
That's a good question. Journal paywalls are definitely a "problem" but I don't feel like it's the issue here. Remember, ChatGPT is basically just trying to guess what the next word(s) are based on its statistical analysis of the content it's consumed (a gross oversimplification I know). It's not looking at an article, finding a fact, and citing that article in the way that people do. That's why you'll see fabricated references that include authors who have actually written on the topic (they just didn't write the fake paper being cited) or journals listed that actually have published in whatever field the article is about.
🎯 Key Takeaways for quick navigation: 00:00 📝 Researchers claim AI generated papers autonomously from data. 01:23 🧹 AI helps clean and analyze large datasets effectively. 03:15 📊 Researchers used a methodical process of prompts to generate the paper. 04:24 🚫 AI-generated paper lacks novel insights and could struggle with peer review. 06:02 📜 AI-created citations have issues, and paper references are outdated. 07:39 💡 AI's potential in research, like chemistry tasks, is promising. 09:04 🕵️♂️ Concerns about AI potentially facilitating P-hacking in research. 10:09 👥 ChatGPT can assist as a co-pilot in research but needs human oversight. 11:19 📧 Sign up for the creator's newsletter for more information on academic resources. Made with HARPA AI
This project's weaknesses can be addressed and built upon. Make another AI agent that criticizes the novelty of any paper, and make the original agent keep working to find and synthesize novel topics until the critic agent(s) is satisfied, that is, they can't find sufficient coverage of the candidate topic. Reuse of the proposed paper critic agent is evident too -- the journals can use it for their own purposes, and so can academic advisors.
These AI videos are making me anxious. Where will all of this lead to when the technology improves? Is research and academia becoming a thing of the past?
I'd like to show your videos to colleagues who might be interested. Since their English is not up to the speed of your speech: any ideas which AI I could use to transcribe your videos? And which AI to get an abstract of the content?
Pappers written by AI will be peer-reviewd by another AI, and read and reused by some other AI. We won't need scientisats and their publications, the system of publications will turn authonomous
Seriously this guy always click baits us. Stop pretending in the intro you found something amazing that will help us all out and then let us down later as usual.
Hmmmm. Could it be that you aren’t actively involved with empirical research and, thus, can’t see how profound this discussion is? I totally saw what “this guy” promised…and more!
Mr Stapleton's knowledge is perfect for helping make a training set for a paper critic agent. The agent can listen to transcripts of this youtube channel and look for and use his advice directly to improve its capabilities. Mimicry is a form of learning. People like Mr Stapleton are suited to contributing to the growth of paper critic AI agents. It would preferably require yet another AI agent to automate the training of a paper critic agent in the next phase (just reading his youtube video transcripts for the purpose of learning his ability to identify known weaknesses in known scientific papers) but before that happens in phase one, humans like him can show good examples and counterexamples manually with good prompt engineering.
It would be interesting to dive just a bit deeper and see if ChatGPT really wrote from the data it was given or whether it sneakily went out and plagiarized results from other papers written from the same data set. As you mentioned, its findings weren't in any way novel. It's at least plausible that it reverse-engineered its paper from others out there.
Fascinating topic! 📚🤖 The idea of AI generating research papers from data is mind-blowing. Can't wait to dive into this video! 🚀
I would LOVE to see this applied to more complicated systems like in engineering, chemistry, physics, and maybe even mathematics. Unfortunately I don't see this going very far as the datasets get bigger and with more moving parts. We'll have to find ways to consolidate variables, find bridges between various seemingly unrelated concepts, and other ideas that I probably can't even imagine right now.
We were thinking the same thing, great minds think alike!
I wonder if chatbots’ inability to handle citations/references may be related to many journals limit access. If that is the case, with open access publishing becoming more normative, this issue should resolve itself…
That's a good question. Journal paywalls are definitely a "problem" but I don't feel like it's the issue here. Remember, ChatGPT is basically just trying to guess what the next word(s) are based on its statistical analysis of the content it's consumed (a gross oversimplification I know). It's not looking at an article, finding a fact, and citing that article in the way that people do. That's why you'll see fabricated references that include authors who have actually written on the topic (they just didn't write the fake paper being cited) or journals listed that actually have published in whatever field the article is about.
Excellent video Andy.
Omg❤❤❤, what a cute sweater!❤❤❤❤❤
Thanks for the great video. I've seen the future and it's not here yet.
Now that's a beard, yes sir 💪🏼
🎯 Key Takeaways for quick navigation:
00:00 📝 Researchers claim AI generated papers autonomously from data.
01:23 🧹 AI helps clean and analyze large datasets effectively.
03:15 📊 Researchers used a methodical process of prompts to generate the paper.
04:24 🚫 AI-generated paper lacks novel insights and could struggle with peer review.
06:02 📜 AI-created citations have issues, and paper references are outdated.
07:39 💡 AI's potential in research, like chemistry tasks, is promising.
09:04 🕵️♂️ Concerns about AI potentially facilitating P-hacking in research.
10:09 👥 ChatGPT can assist as a co-pilot in research but needs human oversight.
11:19 📧 Sign up for the creator's newsletter for more information on academic resources.
Made with HARPA AI
This project's weaknesses can be addressed and built upon. Make another AI agent that criticizes the novelty of any paper, and make the original agent keep working to find and synthesize novel topics until the critic agent(s) is satisfied, that is, they can't find sufficient coverage of the candidate topic. Reuse of the proposed paper critic agent is evident too -- the journals can use it for their own purposes, and so can academic advisors.
Loved the sweater
Great video as always - a small editing error at 10:42, just a heads up
Haha! Thanks for catching that. Used the editor to cut it out.
@@DrAndyStapleton Happy to help :D Consider it restitution for helping me get through my Masters.
I wonder if a web search ability itself could already help a lot "search for new papers in this area and use the knowledge to improve your work" eg
I wish I could see if it used plugins like Scholar AI, which is great at finding the resources necessary for writing literature reviews.
4:20 How to acces nature
These AI videos are making me anxious. Where will all of this lead to when the technology improves? Is research and academia becoming a thing of the past?
I think ultimately the academic process will always require human scrutiny in terms of both the experimental process and the peer review process
Human will just conduct the experiment
We are moving toward human heads without a brain.
@@markhall2414me too, waste of tax payers money
@@WhySoBroke and you typed that on a device based on inventions from academia, lol
Omg 😭 There was already so much crap out there. Now there's so much more.
I'd like to show your videos to colleagues who might be interested. Since their English is not up to the speed of your speech:
any ideas which AI I could use to transcribe your videos? And which AI to get an abstract of the content?
The difference between ChatGPT and the average academic is that ChatGPT is quite a bit less of a formulaic NPC
Garbage in = garbage out. 😂😂😂
Automated p-hacking w NLP.
Checking each and every paper reference is a boring job, perfect for automation.
Pappers written by AI will be peer-reviewd by another AI, and read and reused by some other AI. We won't need scientisats and their publications, the system of publications will turn authonomous
First.... In vacation in Langkawi 😂
Have fun
Why write a paper when only the AIs will read them
Seriously this guy always click baits us. Stop pretending in the intro you found something amazing that will help us all out and then let us down later as usual.
This guy? Man, everyone on RUclips does that, that's how you make money here
Hmmmm. Could it be that you aren’t actively involved with empirical research and, thus, can’t see how profound this discussion is? I totally saw what “this guy” promised…and more!
So, 2018 paper is old?lol😂
Why are you yelling?
So in conclusion: Artificial intelligence isn't all that intelligent. :D
In the last 6 months of using it. I’ve concluded
AI = overrated
speaking of diabetes for personal experience go low carb and IF.
Great more junk spam papers to check.