We are expecting the US Government’s AI Action Plan to be issued over the summer. In the meantime, we may glean some of the administration’s views by looking at recently issued information from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB).
It is time for OA proponents to engage in public debate with academic associations, universities and national funding agencies, because the widespread use of academic content in AI models poses significant risks for the research ecosystem.
An interview with Aaron Wood, discussing the APA’s comprehensive approach to AI.
I think human-dependent peer review has lost its human element, thus its relevance, so what we can do to install a new system by abandoning the present one?
Adapting to AI requires a commitment to fostering AI literacy and creating spaces to openly discuss its challenges and implications.
Image integrity has been a growing issue in scholarly publishing. Todd Carpenter suggests we addreess the problem of image integrity at scale.
I tried three different large language models (LLMs) to rewrite a potential article.
If the local pub trivia master is looking for information on Agatha Christie, what are the available options? How will AI change the nature of literary scholarship?
Model licenses simplified library licenses in the 2000s. The same approach can streamline licensing scholarly content for AI training today.
The first AI training case has been decided in the US in favor of the copyright holder.
“Rights reservation language, whether in plain English, included in terms, or coded into, e.g., metadata, is “machine readable.” It is a choice by an AI developer to not read “human readable” rights reservation language.”
What are prompts in our writing tools asking us if we want to “rewrite with AI” really telling us? And what would broad adoption of those tools mean for creativity and scholarly research communication?
As a result of EU law and other factors, rights holders are reserving their AI rights. This material is available for AI training/licensing.
Before we plunge into 2025, a look back at 2024, a year of uncertainty in The Scholarly Kitchen.
A focus on four rising technology trends and the challenges and opportunities they might bring to scholarly communications.