Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39438283›Full record

ArticleJournal of chemical information and modeling2024

Gotcha GPT: Ensuring the Integrity in Academic Writing.

João Gabriel Gralha, André Silva Pimentel

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of chemical information and modeling, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Can ChatGPT pass the Turkish Orthopedics and Traumatology Board Examination? Turkish orthopedic surgeons versus artificial intelligence.Ulusal travma ve acil cerrahi dergisi = Turkish journal of trauma & emergency surgery : TJTES · 2025
    Observational
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

João Gabriel GralhaDepartamento de Química, Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, RJ 22453-900, Brazil.ORCID 0009-0003-1277-3510
André Silva PimentelDepartamento de Química, Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, RJ 22453-900, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0002-1301-0561

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This application note explores how to address a challenging problem faced by many academics and publishing professionals in recent years: ensuring the integrity of academic writing in universities and publishing houses due to advances in Artificial Intelligence (AI). It distinguishes AI- and human-generated English manuscripts using classifier models such as decision tree, random forest, extra trees, and AdaBoost. It utilizes Scikit learn libraries to provide statistics (precision, accuracy, recall, F1, MCC, and Cohen's kappa scores) and the confusion matrix to guarantee confidence to the user. The accuracy of the model evaluation for classification ranges from 0.97 to 0.99. There is a text data set of approximately 400 AI-generated texts and around 400 human-generated texts used for training and testing (50/50 random split). The AI texts were generated using detailed prompts that describe the text format of abstracts, introductions, discussions, and conclusions of scientific manuscripts in specific subjects. The tutorials for Gotcha GPT are written in Python by using the highly versatile Google Colaboratory platform. They are made freely available via GitHub (https://github.com/andresilvapimentel/Gotcha-GPT).

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceWritingHumansSoftware

Identifiers

PMID39438283
PMCPMC11558662

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.