Will Machines Replace Us? Machine-Authored Texts and the Future of Scholarship

We present here the first machine-generated law review article. Our self-interest motivates us to believe that knowledge workers who write complex articles drawing upon years of research and effort are safe from AI developments. However, how reasonable is it to persist in this belief given recent ad...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales:	Benjamin Alarie, Arthur Cockfield, GPT-3 .
Formato:	article
Lenguaje:	EN
Publicado:	Queensland University of Technology 2021
Materias:	artificial intelligence ai gpt-3 legal singularity legal scholarship Law in general. Comparative and uniform law. Jurisprudence K1-7720
Acceso en línea:	https://doaj.org/article/7c792f42dd82466a8eb9d96aa814b77b
Etiquetas:	Agregar Etiqueta Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!

id	oai:doaj.org-article:7c792f42dd82466a8eb9d96aa814b77b
record_format	dspace
spelling	oai:doaj.org-article:7c792f42dd82466a8eb9d96aa814b77b2021-11-08T01:48:43ZWill Machines Replace Us? Machine-Authored Texts and the Future of Scholarship2652-407410.5204/lthj.2089https://doaj.org/article/7c792f42dd82466a8eb9d96aa814b77b2021-11-01T00:00:00Zhttps://lthj.qut.edu.au/article/view/2089https://doaj.org/toc/2652-4074We present here the first machine-generated law review article. Our self-interest motivates us to believe that knowledge workers who write complex articles drawing upon years of research and effort are safe from AI developments. However, how reasonable is it to persist in this belief given recent advances in AI research? With that topic in mind, we caused GPT-3, a state-of-the-art AI, to generate a paper that explains “why humans will always be better lawyers, drivers, CEOs, presidents, and law professors than artificial intelligence and robots can ever hope to be.” The resulting paper, with no edits apart from giving it a title and bolding the headings generated by GPT-3, is reproduced below. It is imperfect in a humorous way. Ironically, it is publishable “as-is” only because it is machine-generated. Nevertheless, the resulting paper is good enough to give us some pause for thought. Although GPT-3 is not up to the task of replacing law review authors currently, we are far less confident that GPT-5 or GPT-100 might not be up to the task in future.Benjamin AlarieArthur CockfieldGPT-3 .Queensland University of Technologyarticleartificial intelligenceaigpt-3legal singularitylegal scholarshipLaw in general. Comparative and uniform law. JurisprudenceK1-7720ENLaw, Technology and Humans, Vol 3, Iss 2, Pp 5-11 (2021)
institution	DOAJ
collection	DOAJ
language	EN
topic	artificial intelligence ai gpt-3 legal singularity legal scholarship Law in general. Comparative and uniform law. Jurisprudence K1-7720
spellingShingle	artificial intelligence ai gpt-3 legal singularity legal scholarship Law in general. Comparative and uniform law. Jurisprudence K1-7720 Benjamin Alarie Arthur Cockfield GPT-3 . Will Machines Replace Us? Machine-Authored Texts and the Future of Scholarship
description	We present here the first machine-generated law review article. Our self-interest motivates us to believe that knowledge workers who write complex articles drawing upon years of research and effort are safe from AI developments. However, how reasonable is it to persist in this belief given recent advances in AI research? With that topic in mind, we caused GPT-3, a state-of-the-art AI, to generate a paper that explains “why humans will always be better lawyers, drivers, CEOs, presidents, and law professors than artificial intelligence and robots can ever hope to be.” The resulting paper, with no edits apart from giving it a title and bolding the headings generated by GPT-3, is reproduced below. It is imperfect in a humorous way. Ironically, it is publishable “as-is” only because it is machine-generated. Nevertheless, the resulting paper is good enough to give us some pause for thought. Although GPT-3 is not up to the task of replacing law review authors currently, we are far less confident that GPT-5 or GPT-100 might not be up to the task in future.
format	article
author	Benjamin Alarie Arthur Cockfield GPT-3 .
author_facet	Benjamin Alarie Arthur Cockfield GPT-3 .
author_sort	Benjamin Alarie
title	Will Machines Replace Us? Machine-Authored Texts and the Future of Scholarship
title_short	Will Machines Replace Us? Machine-Authored Texts and the Future of Scholarship
title_full	Will Machines Replace Us? Machine-Authored Texts and the Future of Scholarship
title_fullStr	Will Machines Replace Us? Machine-Authored Texts and the Future of Scholarship
title_full_unstemmed	Will Machines Replace Us? Machine-Authored Texts and the Future of Scholarship
title_sort	will machines replace us? machine-authored texts and the future of scholarship
publisher	Queensland University of Technology
publishDate	2021
url	https://doaj.org/article/7c792f42dd82466a8eb9d96aa814b77b
work_keys_str_mv	AT benjaminalarie willmachinesreplaceusmachineauthoredtextsandthefutureofscholarship AT arthurcockfield willmachinesreplaceusmachineauthoredtextsandthefutureofscholarship AT gpt3 willmachinesreplaceusmachineauthoredtextsandthefutureofscholarship
_version_	1718443293011869696

Will Machines Replace Us? Machine-Authored Texts and the Future of Scholarship

Ejemplares similares