Because humans totally don't get things wrong or fabricate lies. Even the term "hallucination" is a clumsy way to describe what is happening when an LLM spits out an unsound statement. What you are doing is more akin to a hallucination than what the LLM is doing. Even in the process of criticizing this technology, you cannot help but to anthropomorphize it.
That's not the point though, the point being made ist that an LLM written paper very likely doesn't actually find something despite looking like it does on the surface
I would like some sort of proof of this claim. I genuinely don't know, but I would suspect that the gap between "things found" in LLM v. Human papers is not as great as we would like it to be.
It certainly casts suspicion on the ‘findings’ which may well be hallucinated or subtly wrong.
Because humans totally don't get things wrong or fabricate lies. Even the term "hallucination" is a clumsy way to describe what is happening when an LLM spits out an unsound statement. What you are doing is more akin to a hallucination than what the LLM is doing. Even in the process of criticizing this technology, you cannot help but to anthropomorphize it.
That's not the point being made.
That's not the point though, the point being made ist that an LLM written paper very likely doesn't actually find something despite looking like it does on the surface
I would like some sort of proof of this claim. I genuinely don't know, but I would suspect that the gap between "things found" in LLM v. Human papers is not as great as we would like it to be.
They don't have any proof, because the claim is wrong.