| If he is using it to reword his papers but the content remains the same it's less concerning.
How is that less concerning? Rewording conclusions or the abstract, even subtly, can change the meaning of those words and of those sections.
How is that less concerning? Rewording conclusions or the abstract, even subtly, can change the meaning of those words and of those sections.
As long as the original researcher reads what's been written, and agrees with it, and the output gives an accurate description of the procedure and results, there's no harm done that I can see.
Edit: I mean in general, not necessarily in this specific case. This guy seems a little...questionable...for other reasons.
It's as different as ChatGPT is from an English-speaking scientist colleague.
For example, a colleague will probably ask if they're not sure which is the intended meaning of a phrase. ChatGPT will generate one of the possible meanings.
In all those cases, mistakes can be made and unintended meanings can creep in. The author has to check the output, definitely, but that doesn't mean those tools shouldn't be used at all.