Abstract
As Earp et al remind us, assigning authorship has many functions. In this discussion, I am concerned with only one function: the allocation of credit. I also limit the scope of discussion to authorship in science (though the points I make will generalise to many other areas of academic inquiry and perhaps beyond). I will argue that credit is essential to the conduct of contemporary science and that the mere availability of large language models (LLMs) is a fundamental threat to it and therefore to scientific inquiry.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Article number | e000303 |
| Pages (from-to) | 1-2 |
| Number of pages | 2 |
| Journal | JME Practical Bioethics |
| Volume | 2 |
| Issue number | 3 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - Jul 2026 |
Bibliographical note
Copyright the Author(s) 2026. Version archived for private and non-commercial use with the permission of the author/s and according to publisher conditions. For further rights please contact the publisher.Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'Death of science (as we know it)'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver