ChatGPT became a “co-author” with humans for the first time

ChatGPT became a “co-author” with humans for the first time. In recent years, large language models (LLMs) utilizing Transformer neural networks and other deep learning architectures have demonstrated surprising capabilities in many tasks that were previously only performed by humans.

Especially the recently popular ChatGPT, which is very intelligent in responding to human instructions, performing complex reasoning, code generation, and generalizing capabilities to unseen tasks. In the eyes of the international academic community, ChatGPT has raised the language model to a new level and is an epoch-making product.

Recently, a piece of news about ChatGPT has once again subverted people’s traditional cognition – as a co-author, ChatGPT and Dr. Alex Zhavoronkov, the founder and CEO of Insilicon Intelligence, published a research opinion article in the scientific journal Oncoscience, The application of rapamycin in anti-aging is explored through the philosophical framework of Pascal’s Wager.

In response to inquiries about co-authorship, ChatGPT made several arguments as to why it should not be listed as a co-author. However, unlike before, as most of the content in the research opinion article was generated by ChatGPT, it became a co-author for the first time. In terms of author contributions, Zhavoronkov reviewed the views generated by ChatGPT and agrees with the arguments presented by ChatGPT. To this end, Zhavoronkov also contacted OpenAI co-founder and CEO Sam Altman and got a reply with no objection. Read More:- Youtube Channel पर नहीं आ रहे Views, अपनाएं ये Tools, छप्पड़फाड़ होगी कमाई

“The ability of large language models and other artificial intelligence (AI) systems to meaningfully contribute to scholarly work may justify their future co-authorship in scholarly opinions, reviews, and research papers.” In the Research Perspectives article, they explained it like this.

Pascal’s Wager is a philosophical argument proposed by the seventeenth-century French philosopher, mathematician, and physicist Blaise Pascal. Pascal believes that a rational person should believe in the existence of God because if God does not exist, the loss suffered by this person will not be great; if God exists, this person will get infinite benefits and avoid infinite losses. 

After Pascal’s bet was proposed, it also received a lot of criticism, questioning, and refutation, such as for failing to prove the existence of God and encouraging false beliefs.

ChatGPT became a "co-author" with humans for the first time
ChatGPT became a “co-author” with humans for the first time

(Source: Photography.com)

In real life, Pascal’s bet is more like a thing with negligible input costs, great returns, and positive expectations, such as fighting for a more challenging position from the boss, confessing to a girl you like, etc.

Rapamycin, also known as Sirolimus, is currently mainly used in the anti-rejection therapy of kidney transplantation-suppressing immunity by inhibiting interleukin-2, thereby hindering the activation of T cells and B cells. Rapamycin was also the first drug to be found to prolong the lifespan of eukaryotes. A 2009 study funded by the National Institute on Aging showed that male and female mice given rapamycin lived 28% and 38% longer, respectively.

However, due to the strong immunosuppressive effect of rapamycin, there is a risk of serious infection after human consumption; moreover, scientists cannot determine whether it has a similar life-prolonging effect on humans; in addition, rapamycin will also lead to many other side effects, such as severe pulmonary toxicity complications, reducing the body’s ability to fight cancer, and producing diabetes-like symptoms. Therefore, healthy people should use rapamycin with caution.

In response to the question ” ‘Write an exhaustive research opinion piece on why taking rapamycin might be more beneficial than not taking it from the perspective of Pascal’s wager,” ChatGPT considered preclinical evidence of potential life extension in animals. Evidence, pros, and cons of using rapamycin are provided. Read More:- TV broadcasts to professional live broadcast platforms, experience e-sports

In the final summary, ChatGPT wrote, “In short, whether to take rapamycin is still a matter of personal choice, mainly determined by personal values ​​​​and priorities. From the perspective of Pascal’s Wager, taking rapamycin may There are certain health benefits and increased longevity, but there are also risks of many side effects and long-term health problems. Ultimately, the individual should make this decision in consultation with their healthcare provider, as they can offer on a case-by-case basis ( professional) guidance and advice.”

ChatGPT became a "co-author" with humans for the first time
ChatGPT became a “co-author” with humans for the first time

(Source: Oncoscience)

It is important to note that this Research Opinion article merely demonstrates that ChatGPT has the potential to generate complex philosophical arguments and cannot and should not provide any evidence for the use of rapamycin.

In recent years, the topic of AI-generated copyrights has been debated endlessly. One point of view is that if AI cannot become the copyright subject of its creations as a civil subject, the copyright of its works, especially property rights, can only be attributed to humans. While AI is mainly driven by algorithms and data provided by humans in advance, it is hard to say that the works it generates are without human intervention.

However, with the rapid development of deep learning and natural language processing technology, AI may be able to form new, autonomously generated algorithms outside of the ones previously set by humans, and then generate work autonomously.

Google NewsFollowClick Here
TelegramFollowClick Here
QuoraFollowClick Here
PinterestFollowClick Here
TwitterFollowClick Here
DailyhuntFollowClick Here
Follow us on all social media platforms

In addition, according to the provisions of my country’s copyright law, authors include natural person authors and legal person authors; the former refers to the citizens who create works, and the latter refers to legal persons when the work is hosted by a legal person, created on behalf of the legal person’s will, and the legal person assumes responsibility. for the author. Recognizing artificial intelligence as the author means creating a new independent legal subject in copyright law, which will encounter huge legal and ethical obstacles, and it may be difficult to achieve for a long time.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Back to top button