Got this email earlier and I’m still upset about it. Some unnamed “team from #Northwestern, #Stanford & #Cornell” fed our preprint through their “#AI" to generate "suggestions" on how we could improve it.
This feels like some really shit #HCI study that seems to think asking for consent is optional. And like one that wants to spin out into an even shittier start-up in the future (hence not giving any names of team members)?
@gedankenstuecke@academicchatter@hci Researchers from Northwestern University also found an increasing number of abstracts in scientific papers which are generated by AI or with its support: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2406.07016
Funny coincidence.
He complained about the high price of parking. He disputed the President's numbers in a "cordial" but "tense" public meeting on the topic. He turned over the research documenting his numbers. Two and a half weeks later, the provost fired him, explaining that Tarleton State University would not "tolerate intolerable behavior."
@rspfau@vfrmedia@gemlog@petersuber@academicchatter
Thanks for this link. People who sign up for leadership positions in higher ed and have not the smallest tolerance for dissent or discomfort are truly baffling to me. I hope this (by all accounts) fine teacher lands well somewhere else.
Nothing says "We care about accessibility and equity for disabled people in STEM like 'Go to Google and let their AI handle it"" #Ableism#DisabledAndSTEM
@ml and the point is not that it is a "zero effort" solution or "not done by human professionals", the point is that AI-generated captions are not good enough in quality to provide sufficient accessibility, and therefore using AI as only accessibility measure is a fucking poor excuse.
Yesterday I finished writing a research paper that I've been working on (as time permitted) for about the last 9 months or so.
The only thing left to do is find a journal or conference to send it to.
Is it better to submit it to a journal, or should I wait until next year for a conference? There's follow-up work that I plan to do, but the paper is already pretty condensed, so I'm not sure if expanding it before submitting somewhere makes sense.
@floe@academicchatter Yeah, it's CS - geometry specifically. I should probably have included that... :)
I just missed the deadline for the CGVC conference (https://cgvc.org.uk), and was considering IEEE Access as the journal. If the dates worked for me then I'd look at GRAPP (https://grapp.scitevents.org/).
Unfortunately I've not published many papers, so I don't have a good feel for selecting the right "level" of conference/journal.
Donella Meadows book Thinking in Systems is a good (but dated) introduction to feedback modeling and systems design in ecology. I've always held-out hope that Agent-Based stimulative modeling would advance sufficiently to simulate the behavior of actors governed by these broad systems patterns. And in a way that could include spatial processes in the modeling. Our computers are big enough now.🙂
Research-based tips for professors and administrators:
> Set norms and expectations about the conversation, not just rules
> Allow students to tell their stories, when they first heard about the issue and how it affected them
> Encourage curiosity by posing non-threatening questions
> Find out the root of the disagreement
> Find cooperative projects for students to act on
> Offer students a safe space after debates to talk and feel reassured https://theconversation.com/6-ways-to-foster-political-discourse-on-college-campuses-230365 @academicchatter