Do we have a policy for adding copy from ChatGPT?

Question

Do we have a policy concerning content from ChatGPT?  I have added some background to a profile using the app and added it to an ancestor biography.  

I wonder if it is acceptable as written?  Look under the sub-heading "Background."   I made up my own notice box because I don't know of any other box to use and wanted to draw attention to it as not authoritative.

Answer 1

Thanks for providing an example profile for the issue of AI-generated content, Peggy!

---

For this specific profile, I have 2 concerns regarding the AI-generated content.

Issue 1 is a minor issue: the content itself is not about the profiled individual, but about a geographic location. My opinion is that the content belongs on a Free-Space page, which then can be linked to the person profile.

Issue 2 is more serious: the content's source material has not been cited by the AI program, leaving the possibility that the content could have been plagiarized.

---

My opinion is that we need a policy regarding the use of AI to generate content for WikiTree profiles. I feel that the user of an AI tool needs to vet the generated content for issues such as plagiarism, copyright violation, and the original source of the information before adding such content to WikiTree.

Answer 2

Peggy, you wrote or provided all the information except what was in the ChatGPT box?

ChatGPT says " I don't have access to my training data, but I was trained on a mixture of licensed data, data created by human trainers, and publicly available data. I do not have direct access to databases, articles, subscription sites, or the content behind paywalls, this includes news sites and academic journals." and etc, etc.

So this information could easily have come from Wikipedia and if it had been added by you would have been sourced as from Wikipedia.

I have multiple concerns about ChatGPT and in its ability to make things up, as evidenced by many news items over the past year.

I don't disbelieve the information about the location but I have not looked for information about the place. Do you think the information is accurate?

Perhaps 'facts' such as those given about a place could be okay, providing they are verified, anything else is pure speculation.

Sometime in late 2022 or early 2023 there was a post about ChatGPT where it had been used to create a possible biography for a woman who was a grandmother.

She was described as a wonderful cook, a good housekeeper, well liked by her neighbours, cared for her grandkids etc, etc but it was nothing to do with the person's profile, it was a generic compilation about a stereotyped grandmother.

I think this AI programs have a very long way to go before they could be reliable.

Right now they seem to be a machine version of an idiot savant, skilled in some areas but with huge problems in most other fields.

Comments

Correct: I wrote and cited the information not inside the ChatGPT box.  In addition, I edited the ChatGPT content, removing repetition, blatant speculation, and irrelevant information; and formatting for quality and sequence.

ChatGPT did not attempt to provide any specific information about this individual and did not make anything up about him personally.

I did not verify either the "facts" such as the railroads or the speculation concerning such things as farm crops.

I agree that I probably could have researched and found the same information from Wikipedia and cited Wikipedia.  That would probably have taken several hours and would not be as well written.  My session with ChatGPT, in comparison, took fifteen minutes including my corrections of its content.

Answer 3

Whether it's from ChatGPT or not, I don't think  any of the text about Hagerstown belongs on this profile. You need to think that, if it belongs on the profile of John Kurtz, the same text would belong on every single person who lived in Hagerstown.

What you should really do instead is use the (existing) Hagerstown category https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Category:Hagerstown%2C_Maryland and if you're very motivated, create a linked Free Space page instead.

Also: I see no problem in principle with using ChatGPT as a writing aid, any more than spell check is a problem, but don't use it as a source for facts. There is a discussion here: https://www.wikitree.com/g2g/1665597/should-wikitree-have-a-style-guide-for-ai-generated-content

Comments

I agree with all the above, seems like this AI is collating data from uncited sources and generating something it ''thinks'' is appropriate.  It cannot cite its sources from what it says.  Not at all something useful to my mind.