Is AI infiltrating scientific publishing? Rise of ‘suspicious’ tell words popping up in published papers

ai in scientific publishing
Credit: MDPI

Researchers are misusing ChatGPT and other artificial intelligence chatbots to produce scientific literature. At least, that’s a new fear that some scientists have raised, citing a stark rise in suspicious AI shibboleths showing up in published papers.

Some of these tells—such as the inadvertent inclusion of “certainly, here is a possible introduction for your topic” in a recent paper in Surfaces and Interfaces, a journal published by Elsevier—are reasonably obvious evidence that a scientist used an AI chatbot known as a large language model (LLM). But “that’s probably only the tip of the iceberg,” says scientific integrity consultant Elisabeth Bik. (A representative of Elsevier told Scientific American that the publisher regrets the situation and is investigating how it could have “slipped through” the manuscript evaluation process.) In most other cases AI involvement isn’t as clear-cut, and automated AI text detectors are unreliable tools for analyzing a paper.

Follow the latest news and policy debates on sustainable agriculture, biomedicine, and other ‘disruptive’ innovations. Subscribe to our newsletter.

Researchers from several fields have, however, identified a few key words and phrases (such as “complex and multifaceted”) that tend to appear more often in AI-generated sentences than in typical human writing. “When you’ve looked at this stuff long enough, you get a feel for the style,” says Andrew Gray, a librarian and researcher at University College London.

This is an excerpt. Read the original post here

{{ reviewsTotal }}{{ options.labels.singularReviewCountLabel }}
{{ reviewsTotal }}{{ options.labels.pluralReviewCountLabel }}
{{ options.labels.newReviewButton }}
{{ userData.canReview.message }}

Related Articles

Infographic: Global regulatory and health research agencies on whether glyphosate causes cancer

Infographic: Global regulatory and health research agencies on whether glyphosate causes cancer

Does glyphosate—the world's most heavily-used herbicide—pose serious harm to humans? Is it carcinogenic? Those issues are of both legal and ...

Most Popular

vax-misinformation-main
Facts & Fallacies Podcast: Limit free speech to blunt social media misinfo?
Picture1
The FDA couldn’t find a vaccine safety crisis, so it buried its own research
ChatGPT-Image-Apr-16-2026-02_56_53-PM
Financial incentives, over diagnosis, and weak oversight: Autism claims are driving up Medicare costs
Screenshot-2026-05-08-at-11.55.47-AM
Anti-vax activists falsely blame COVID vaccines for the rising U.S. cancer rate among younger people.
ChatGPT-Image-May-12-2026-11_27_01-AM-2
AI likely to improve health care, research shows—but not for blacks and ethnic minorities
modi visit sikkim
Viewpoint: Indian PM wants farmers to switch to 50% organic. It would take at least 10 years, likely won’t work, and isn’t more sustainable
ChatGPT-Image-May-7-2026-12_32_36-PM
Viewpoint: The state of U.S. vaccine policy? Dismal nationally, but some states are stepping up.
Screenshot-2026-04-22-at-12.21.32-PM
Viewpoint: Why the retracted Monsanto glyphosate study doesn’t change the science—the world’s most popular herbicide is safe 
Screenshot-2026-05-19-at-11.23.34-AM
West-originated vaccine disinformation sparks murders of health care workers across Africa
Screenshot-2026-04-13-at-1.39.26-PM
Viewpoint: ‘Safer for children?’ Stonyfield yogurt under fire for deceptive organic marketing
Screenshot-2026-05-18-at-12.57.12-PM
Viewpoint—‘Technology is pulling us apart’: Environmental, political, and economic
ChatGPT-Image-May-12-2026-08_39_41-PM
GLP podcast: Big Pharma, Big Ag, Big Food—health harming industries or life-saving innovators?
newborn infant baby mother
Sharp rise in number of parents refusing newborn vitamin K shots, putting babies at 81-fold higher risk of severe bleeding
glp menu logo outlined

Get news on human & agricultural genetics and biotechnology delivered to your inbox.