“Unlocking Ethical AI: Insights from Aaron Wood on Safeguarding Employee Rights and Research Integrity”
With generative AI technologies, much of that context has been stripped out. For example, retracted content is treated the same as anything else. And that’s problematic for the science because it could be perpetuating flawed research.
So what does that mean? How do you deal with that as a publisher? There are a number of angles to that.
At APA, when we’re developing features or generative AI technologies for our content and products, we make sure to remove that content from our vector database and our RAG models. Luckily, there are tools for that. CrossRef has an API, for example, where publishers contribute their information about updates to records, including retractions. That API also includes retractions from Retraction Watch, which means that there’s a central place to go in and pull that content out of your systems and therefore improve the science. We also use licensing to reinforce content integrity.
Post Comment