<![CDATA[Even in an instance where GenAI is technically correct it's still guessing, meaning that it's right for the wrong reasons &amp; the result can't be replicated, a huge science no-no.]]>RE: https://social.coop/@natematias/116606979531755936

Even in an instance where GenAI is technically correct it's still guessing, meaning that it's right for the wrong reasons & the result can't be replicated, a huge science no-no.

Also, the proof of work thing I've mentioned before; the content of a scientific paper isn't longwinded for fun - it shows that whoever wrote is understands the topic well enough to work on it, stand by the research & explore it further.

If statistically generated it's literally worthless page filler.

]]>https://forum.fedi.dk/topic/1c602995-ad7b-49f4-a9df-38f9c008e694/even-in-an-instance-where-genai-is-technically-correct-it-s-still-guessing-meaning-that-it-s-right-for-the-wrong-reasons-amp-the-result-can-t-be-replicated-a-huge-science-no-no.RSS for NodeThu, 11 Jun 2026 14:02:34 GMTThu, 21 May 2026 08:27:11 GMT60<![CDATA[Reply to Even in an instance where GenAI is technically correct it's still guessing, meaning that it's right for the wrong reasons &amp; the result can't be replicated, a huge science no-no. on Thu, 21 May 2026 12:56:48 GMT]]>@va2lam It can get to be too much - but even that author probably piles on with the verbiage to try & deliver substantial proof of work. It still has greater value than if the verbiage came out of a stochastic text extruder.

]]>https://forum.fedi.dk/post/https://helvede.net/users/jwcph/statuses/116612674909286396https://forum.fedi.dk/post/https://helvede.net/users/jwcph/statuses/116612674909286396Thu, 21 May 2026 12:56:48 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Even in an instance where GenAI is technically correct it's still guessing, meaning that it's right for the wrong reasons &amp; the result can't be replicated, a huge science no-no. on Thu, 21 May 2026 08:34:21 GMT]]>@jwcph

"Even in an instance where GenAI is technically correct it's still guessing, meaning that it's right for the wrong reasons & the result can't be replicated, a huge science no-no."

🎯

]]>https://forum.fedi.dk/post/https://toot.community/users/proscience/statuses/116611642923379960https://forum.fedi.dk/post/https://toot.community/users/proscience/statuses/116611642923379960Thu, 21 May 2026 08:34:21 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Even in an instance where GenAI is technically correct it's still guessing, meaning that it's right for the wrong reasons &amp; the result can't be replicated, a huge science no-no. on Thu, 21 May 2026 08:34:14 GMT]]>@jwcph (I am actually reviewing a journal submission right now and it is unnecessarily long-winded, with excess adverbs, but this is the exception rather than the rule.)

]]>https://forum.fedi.dk/post/https://mastodon.nz/users/va2lam/statuses/116611642477295598https://forum.fedi.dk/post/https://mastodon.nz/users/va2lam/statuses/116611642477295598Thu, 21 May 2026 08:34:14 GMT