bioRxivScientific Communication & EducationPreprint
Have AI-Generated Texts from LLM Infiltrated the Realm of Scientific Writing? A Large-Scale Analysis of Preprint Platforms
H. Cheng, B. Sheng, A. Lee, V. Chaudhary, A. G. Atanasov, N. Liu, Y. Qiu, T. Y. Wong, Y.-C. Tham, Y.-F. Zheng
Abstract
Since the release of ChatGPT in 2022, AI-generated texts have inevitably permeated various types of writing, sparking debates about the quality and quantity of content produced by such large language models (LLM). This study investigates a critical question: Have AI-generated texts from LLM infiltrated the realm of scientific writing, and if so, to what extent and in what setting? By analyzing a dataset comprised of preprint manuscripts uploaded to arXiv, bioRxiv, and medRxiv over the past two years, we confirmed and quantified the widespread influence of AI-generated texts in scientific publications using the latest LLM-text detection technique, the Binoculars LLM-detector. Further analyses with this tool reveal that: (1) the AI influence correlates with the trend of ChatGPT web searches; (2) it is widespread across many scientific domains but exhibits distinct impacts within them (highest: computer science, engineering sciences); (3) the influence varies with authors who have different language speaking backgrounds and geographic regions according to the location of their affiliations (Italy, China, etc.); (4) AI-generated texts are used in various content types in manuscripts (most significant: hypothesis formulation, conclusion summarization); (5) AI usage has a positive influence on papers impact, measured by its citation numbers. Based on these findings, suggestions about the advantages and regulation of AI-augmented scientific writing are discussed.
Reproducibility ledger
Nobody has reported trying to reproduce this paper yet. Did you replicate an experiment or run the code? Your report saves the next lab a week.
Sign in to file a reproducibility report.
Related papers
- Fine-Grained Detection of AI-Generated Writing in the Biomedical Literature
Richard She·bioRxiv·Jan 5, 2026
- ChatGPT identifies gender disparities in scientific peer review
J. P. H. Verharen·bioRxiv·Jul 18, 2023
- Comparing scientific abstracts generated by ChatGPT to original abstracts using an artificial intelligence output detector, plagiarism detector, and blinded human reviewers
C. A. Gao, F. M. Howard, … A. T. Pearson·npj Digital MedicinePeer-reviewed·Apr 26, 2023
- ChatGPT applications in Academic Research: A Review of Benefits, Concerns, and Recommendations
A. AlZaabi, A. ALamri, … A. AalAbdulsallam·bioRxiv·Aug 17, 2023
- Artificial Intelligence's Contribution to Biomedical Literature Search: Revolutionizing or Complicating?
Rui Yip, Young Joo Sun, … Vinit B. Mahajan·PLOS Digital HealthPeer-reviewed·May 12, 2025
- Set-up, validation, evaluation, and cost-benefit analysis of an AI-assisted assessment of responsible research practices in a sample of life science publications
Silke Kniffert, Ben Katthöfer, … Ulf Toelch·bioRxiv·Feb 2, 2026