Spot the Difference: Can AI Generate Reliable BMJ Christmas Trophies?
AI-generated titles are just as engaging and enjoyable for readers as actual titles, however, the effect is enhanced by human intervention; AI may have the job of formulating hypotheses or guiding analysis in the future.
Synthetic intelligence (AI) know-how can generate believable, entertaining and scientifically compelling headlines for potential analytical articles, finds a test in the Christmas theme of The BMJ.
An examination of The BMJ’s hottest Christmas analysis articles – which combines mostly science-based evidence with lighthearted or quirky themes – shows that AI-generated headlines have appeals to such a reader, however, as in other fields of medicine, efficiency is enhanced by human penetration. .
As a result, the researchers say AI could have the job of formulating hypotheses or guiding analysis in the future.
AI has been used to support documented diagnostic cases, mainly based on the concept of laptop engineering that can be taught from information and identify patterns. However, can AI be used to generate valid hypotheses for medical analysis?
To find out, the researchers used the titles of The BMJ’s 13 most-read Christmas analysis articles of the previous 10 years as the AI-generated instant equivalent, which they scored because scientific interest, entertainment and rationality.
The 10 AI-generated titles with the highest scores and the lowest 10 were then mixed with 10 actual Christmas analysis articles and evaluated on a random sample of 25 documents from a variety of disciplines. in Africa, Australia and Europe.
The results showed that AI-generated headlines were rated as pleasant (64% v 69%) and engaging (70% v 68%) as real headlines, even though the actual title was rated as more reliable (73% v 48%).
Total AI-generated headlines have been judged to have far less scientific or academic benefit than actual headlines (58% v 39%), however this difference becomes negligible. makes sense when people manage AI output (58% v 49%).
The findings, the authors say, are consistent with previous research on AI that showed perfect results from combining machine research with human supervision.
Among the AI-generated headlines, among the many highest for plausibility were “The Scientific Efficacy of Lollipops as a Treatment for Sore Throats” and “The Consequences of Espresso for Humans.” free connoisseurs on occasions of emergency division readiness: an observational examination.”
The funniest title generated by the AI is “Make Your Nipple Called Together and See If It Stops The Pains of Erectile Dysfunction at Work”, though the authors argue that this illustrates the AI’s inability to see the real-world utility of checking and knowing if headlines are offensive.
They acknowledge some limitations, however they argue that even amid headlines as outlandish as those in the Christmas issue with The BMJ, “AI has the potential to produce believable results.” can participate and will attract potential readers.”
They do, however, stress the importance of human intervention, “a discovery that reflects the potential use of AI in scientific medicine, as its determination to rationally help rather than completely replace it.” all doctors,” they concluded.
Reference: “Analysis: Ghosts in machines or monkeys with typewriters — headline production for The BMJ Christmas analytical articles using synthetic intelligence: observational testing” December 15 2021, The BMJ.
DOI: 10.1136 / bmj-2021-067732
