[throwawayyy9237]

I don't have time to properly go through the entire list, of course, but the first paper that I've opened seemed to use ChatGPT to format a table of values, presumably not in tabular format originally. It didn't _seem_ like any of the ideas or conclusions were GPT-created.

I'm perfectly fine with this usage, although it is very sloppy if the authors and reviewers didn't pick the "certainly" in the final text.

[pavel_lishin]

I'd be very wary of the LLM hallucinating a few number changes here and there, similar to what copies used to have a habit of doing: https://www.dkriesel.com/en/blog/2013/0802_xerox-workcentres...

[throwawayyy9237]

Absolutely, the time saved formatting a table + time triple checking it might be the same as doing manually in the first place.

But I was talking about the intended usage, it doesn't sit as fraudulent to me in the scientific sense.

[AlecSchueler]

You can ask it for code that will convert your input into tabulated output. Easier to check the logic of the code than all of the values in the table, then just plug your data into it.

[croes]

But it shows a lack of care in the preparation of the paper