AI Definitions: Chain of thought (CoT)

Chain of thought (CoT) prompts – Prompting an AI with “Using chain of thought…” or “Let’s think about the answer step by step…” is telling it to answer a question by breaking complex tasks into a sequence of logical steps. These types of prompts simulate human-like reasoning by having the AI evaluate its response. This slows arriving at the final prompt response, but it cuts down on hallucinations and help with difficult problems. Users can read the fascinating and often convoluted way it got to its response, which is a help to AI  safety researchers looking for undesirable behaviors like deception. However, the reported Chain-of-Thought might not accurately reflect the actual reasoning process. In fact, a model could even hide aspects of its thought process from the user.

More AI definitions here.

Fake AI Students

“By the end of the first two weeks of the semester, Smith had whittled down the 104 students enrolled in her classes, including those on the waitlist, to just 15. The rest, she’d concluded, were fake students, often referred to as bots. ‘It’s a surreal experience and it’s just heartbreaking,’ Smith said. ‘I’m not teaching, I’m playing a cop now.’” - Voice of San Diego

Diversity’s connection to Creativity

When people are exposed to a more diverse group of people, their brains are forced to process complex and unexpected information. The more people do this, the better they become at producing complex and unexpected information themselves. This trains us to look more readily look beyond the obvious - precisely the hallmark of creative thinking. 

Researchers have also found that creating and enjoying the arts can help us see things from a new perspective, by putting ourselves in a character's shoes. They can also create a feeling of connectedness and general kindness.

Opening ourselves to new experiences can seem hard to do, but it can help us cross divides and nurture new and inclusive friendships.

Julie Van de Vyver & Richard Crisp writing in BBC News 

Figuring out the Flip Side

Artists should engage in debates about AI, not about how to stop this – that's folly – but about how to figure out the right monetization mechanism for this new world. Just as Google created a new economy based around the notion of links and clicks, paid for by new forms of advertising, these AI tools are already creating a new economy around creation and information and delegation (and likely every other “ion”, eventually).

People are increasingly paying for such newfangled tools and services, which is great, as that probably wouldn’t have been the case 20 years ago, when the rails weren’t yet in place. Now to figure out the flip side: how to get people paid for helping to power such things. – MG Siegler writing in Spyglass

Emotional Support Punctuation

“The em dash is such a powerful writing tool that also carries great subtlety to it,” said Aileen Gallagher, a journalism professor at Syracuse University. “The idea that it is an indicator of soulless, dead AI-generated writing is really upsetting to me. Moniza Hossain, a children’s author based in Britain, called the em dash her “emotional support punctuation mark.” -Washington Post

What’s our job?

Last year, I sat in a faculty meeting while a guest lecturer gleefully explained how they had used AI to design their class, craft PowerPoint presentations, and develop exams. At the end of the presentation, a colleague leaned over and asked, “Then what’s our job?” I have thought long and hard about that question. If faculty hope to survive, much less prosper, in the age of AI, they need to come up with a compelling answer to that question: “What’s our job?” -Scott Latham writing in the Chronicle of Higher Ed

Driving in a Snowstorm to see a Game

Two avid sports fans plan to travel 40 miles to see a basketball game. One of them paid for his ticket: the other was on his way to purchase a ticket when he got one free from a friend. A blizzard is announced for the night of the game. Which of the two ticket holders is more likely to brave the blizzard to see the game?

The answer is immediate: we know that the fan who paid for his ticket is more likely to drive. Mental accounting provides the explanation. We assume that both fans set up an account for the game they hoped to see. Missing the game will close the accounts with a negative balance. Regardless of how they came by their ticket, both will be disappointed – but the closing balance is distinctly more negative for the one who bought a ticket and is now out of pocket as well as deprived of the game. Because staying home is worse for this individual, he is more motivated to see the game and therefore more likely to make the attempt to drive into a blizzard.

The emotions that people attach to the state of their mental accounts are not acknowledged in standard economic theory. An Econ would realize that the ticket has already been paid for and cannot be returned. Its cost is “sunk” and the Econ would not care whether he had bought the ticket to the game or got it from a friend (if Econs have friends). To implement this rational behavior, (the fan) would have to be aware of the counterfactual possibility. “Would I still drive into this snowstorm if I had gotten the ticket free from a friend?” It takes an active disciplined mind to raise such a difficult question.

Thinking, Fast and Slow, Daniel Kahneman

23 Articles about AI & Academic Scholarship

AI bots are overwhelming some journals – C&EN 

AI research summaries ‘exaggerate findings’, study warns – Times Higher Ed

Ethics in Academic Research: Who Is Responsible for Unethical Practices—AI, Scholars, Editors, or Institutions? – PrePrints

A Scanning Error Created a Fake Science Term—Now AI Won’t Let It Die - Gizmodo

GenAI Footprint in Scholarly Publications Reflects Complex Issues of Ac. Integrity Post-Plagiarism (video) - PUPP 

AI is transforming peer review — and many scientists are worried – Nature

A Shortcut or a Level Up? Harvard Faculty Debate Generative AI in Academia – The Crimson

Publishers Embrace AI as Research Integrity Tool – Inside Higher Ed 

AI tools are spotting errors in research papers: inside a growing movement – Nature

AI search summaries cannibalise academic publishers’ web traffic – Times Higher Ed

An academic paper written by AI passed peer review — but it’s a bit more nuanced than that – Tech Crunch

Trying to Write an Academic Paper with LLM Assistance – Scholarly Kitchen  

Academic publishers warn against AI copyright plans - Research Professional News – Research Professional News  

AI detectors are poor western blot classifiers: a study of accuracy and predictive values – PeerJ  

Will AI jeopardize science photography? – Nature

Can AI Solve the Peer Review Crisis? - IZA Institute of Labor Economics 

Publishers need to provide guidelines on use of AI in research, says Wiley – Chemistry World  

ChatGPT to help peer review scientific studies in UK Government trial – Telegraph

Generative artificial intelligence usage guidelines for scholarly publishing: a cross-sectional study of medical journals – BMC Medicine  

Retractions Increase 10-Fold in 20 Years - and Now AI is Involved – AAPS News

A viral video reveals how an AI-generated mistake led to nearly two dozen flawed research papers – Economic  Times  

Is AI the new research scientist? Not so, according to a human-led study. – University of Florida  

The Use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Academic Writing and Publishing Papers – Research Gate

AI Definitions: Generative engine optimization (GEO)

Generative engine optimization (GEO) – This is the process of optimizing your website’s content to boost its visibility in AI-driven search engines (ChatGPT, Perplexity, Gemini, Copilot and Google AI). As SEO helps brands increase visibility on search engines (Google, Microsoft Bing) while GEO is all about how brands appear on AI-driven platforms. There is overlap between the goals of GEO and traditional SEO. Both SEO and GEO use keywords and prioritize engaging content as well as conversational queries and contextual phrasing. Both consider how fast a website loads, mobile friendliness, and prefer technically sound website. However, while SEO is concerned with metatags and links in response to user queries, GEO is about quick, direct responses from synthesizes content out of multiple sources.

More AI definitions here