Blog

How to prepare scientists to unleash creativity with ChatGPT

https://publicdomainvectors.org/en/free-clipart/Silhouette-of-human-brain-color-pattern/86562.html

A few weeks ago I posted about the potential to use AI to create digital clones of oneself to talk to. Two days later, literally, Open AI released ChatGPT and boom…. it was there (a starter at least)! Like many other, I spent some time talking and learning what it could and could not do. Most people celebrated ChatGPT, but some feared and soon enough, attempts to censor it started to come along:

NYC education department blocks ChatGPT on school devices, networks or

These teachers, like many others in face of new technology, feel threatened and engane in an senseless defensive attempt to block the new technology instead of rush to adapt and find ways to use it as what it can be: an ally to free them from the boredom of telling students to memorize rules! And help them achieve their full potential by doing what they can do better than computers: teach students how to develop criteria!

If they knew better, they’d be celebrating, for ChatGPT is a powerful ally.

If writing is re-writing, and you have to do it several times until some hard to express internal criteria tells you it is ok, than chat GPT can help you write hundreds of versions of an essay before you put it out to the world.

It won’t write anything you won’t teach it. And you will still have to select the best answer. What else could we expect them to learn?

Here I give an example of a text I had ChatGPT helping me re-write. The result is impressive! Check for yourself. A couple more rounds and it will be perfect!


How would you re-write this text: “Silva et al. 2018 on the bioinvasion of the brown mussel Perna perna in Brazil states that “the question of whether a species is a bioinvader or not may not be straightforward”. P. perna is presently widely distributed in Brasil and considered to be naturalized. But how long does it take for ‘naturalization’ and how do we measure it? If filogenetically we assume that all living beings diverged from a last universal common ancestor – LUCA, then it should be reasonable to assume that all native species also diverged from an exotic or invasive ancestor. Moreover, the ultimate goal of every species to maximize is to survive and reproduce, and, as a population, to expand, to finding and obtaining resources such as food, water, and shelter, as well as avoiding predators and other threats to their survival. It also often involves finding a mate and reproducing, either through sexual or asexual reproduction. Species have different strategies to achieve these goals, for example r and k strategies. “r strategists” have a high reproductive rate and are able to produce a large number of offspring in a short period of time. These species tend to have short lifespans and reproduce at an early age. They are well-suited to environments that are unpredictable or have a high degree of variability, as they can take advantage of temporary or ephemeral resources. These charactetics are common to pioneer species that are the first to colonize a previously unoccupied habitat. These species are often hardy and able to tolerate a wide range of environmental conditions, and they can play an important role in the development and establishment of new ecosystems. Could we than differentiate a pioneer from an invasive species? Or an invasion from a leggitimate dispersion? If so, what are the variables and the metrics in both cases? These questions are hard to answer. The definition of an invasive/invasion then seems to be dependent of damage to the invaded ecosystem: “In contrast, an invasive species is a species that is not native to a particular ecosystem and causes harm to the ecosystem or to the species that are already living there. These species can have negative impacts on native species by outcompeting them for resources, carrying diseases that can affect native species, or causing physical damage to the ecosystem.” A definition like this has several logical problems. I have argued for a long time that defining Damage requires a perspective: damage to whom? It also should require a scale: a drop of oil in the ocean may disrupt the balance of its microsurroundings, but is irrelevant to the volume of the whole ocean. Bastianoni in 1998 proposed the use of emergy/exervy thermodynamic goal functions to measure the difference between a new equilibrium state (after the introduction of something) compared to a previous equilibrium state. It is probably still extremely hard to evaluate emergy/exergy in a complex ecosystem, but at least it fullfil what I believe are the requirements for an independent, unbiased and helpful measure of balance. So when asked to determine if the Sun Coral (orange and yellow cup corals Tubastreae sp) are indeed invasive species we wondered: can we use thermodynamic goal functions to determine it?”