Should Artificial Intelligence‐based language models be allowed in developing scientific manuscripts? A debate between ChatGPT and the editors of Liver International

The development of advanced language models, such as ChatGPT3.5/4.0 by OpenAI, is likely to revolutionize many fields including the scientific field. In theory, descriptive reviews, grant submissions, or revision of submitted manuscripts could mostly be drafted by a conversational interface running these language models, such as ChatGPT, with little to no input/control by scientists and physicians. The benefits and weaknesses of such an approach are easy to spot: on the one hand, ChatGPT could allow faster dissemination of knowledge while also significantly reducing workload; on the other hand, one cannot wonder what added role any author would play besides factchecking the automatically generated text. Discussions on this topic are hot with 143 papers authored in 2023 on this issue. Our Editor Wiley states in its Ethical Guidelines section that “Artificial Intelligence Generated Content (AIGC) tools— such as ChatGPT and others based on large language models (LLMs)— cannot be considered capable of initiating an original piece of research without direction by human authors. They also cannot be accountable for a published work or for research design, which is a generally held requirement of authorship (as discussed in the previous section), nor do they have legal standing or the ability to hold or assign copyright. If an author has used this kind of tool to develop any portion of a manuscript, its use must be described, transparently and in detail, in the Methods or Acknowledgements section. The author is fully responsible for the accuracy of any information provided by the tool and for correctly referencing any supporting work on which that information depends”. As Academic Editors we strongly support this statement but also wonder whether a stricter editorial policy should be applied to articles submitted to Liver International. We thought the best way to answer this question was to ask ChatGPT itself. We first asked ChatGPT to draft an editorial on this topic and received this generated text: “As an advanced language model, ChatGPT is a highly sophisticated tool that can assist researchers in the field of liver diseases to develop their research papers with ease. However, the use of ChatGPT in the scientific community is still relatively new, and there are potential risks and benefits that need to be evaluated before researchers can start relying on it for their scientific writing. On the one hand, ChatGPT has the potential to significantly enhance the quality of scientific writing. With its ability to generate highly accurate and detailed responses to various prompts, it can assist researchers in drafting manuscripts, grant proposals, and other scientific documents with ease. ChatGPT's advanced natural language processing capabilities can provide insights into the latest research in the field of liver diseases, help researchers identify key knowledge gaps, and suggest ways to improve the quality of their writing. Another potential benefit of using ChatGPT for scientific writing is its ability to save time and improve productivity. Writing a research paper on liver diseases can be a complex and timeconsuming process, requiring researchers to invest a considerable amount of time and effort in drafting, editing, and revising their work. ChatGPT can significantly reduce the time required to write a research paper by generating wellstructured and detailed drafts that can serve as the foundation for further refinement and improvement. However, it is important to acknowledge that with any new technology, there are potential risks and drawbacks associated with its use, especially when it comes to scientific writing. While ChatGPT has the potential to improve the efficiency and accuracy of scientific writing, there are several risks that should be taken into consideration. One significant risk is the possibility of introducing bias into scientific research. As an AIbased system, ChatGPT is only as objective as the data it is trained on. If the training data contains biases or inaccuracies, ChatGPT may inadvertently perpetuate these biases in scientific writing, leading to incorrect or misleading conclusions. Moreover, the use of ChatGPT in scientific writing may lead to the commodification of research, as researchers and publishers may prioritize quantity and speed over quality, leading to the production of large volumes of lowquality research that could flood the scientific literature. Such an approach could also hinder the development of critical thinking and creativity in scientific research, as researchers may rely too heavily on AIbased systems to generate ideas and hypotheses. Another potential risk associated with the use of ChatGPT in scientific writing is the issue of transparency and reproducibility. ChatGPT operates as a ‘black box,’ making it difficult to understand how it generates its outputs. This makes it challenging to reproduce and validate scientific findings based on ChatGPTgenerated texts. Furthermore, the lack of transparency in ChatGPT's algorithms and decisionmaking processes raises questions about the accountability of research and potential ethical issues that may arise from its use. Therefore, it is important for researchers and publishers to exercise caution and due diligence