Petr Parshakov, Iuliia Naidenova, Sofia Paklina, Nikita Matkin, Cornel Nesseler
In this paper, we investigate how individuals evaluate human and large langue models generated responses to popular questions when the source of the content is either concealed or disclosed. Through a controlled field experiment, participants were presented with a set of questions, each accompanied by a response generated by either a human or an AI. In a randomized design, half of the participants were informed of the response's origin while the other half remained unaware. Our findings indicate that, overall, participants tend to prefer AI-generated responses. However, when the AI origin is revealed, this preference diminishes significantly, suggesting that evaluative judgments are influenced by the disclosure of the response's provenance rather than solely by its quality. These results underscore a bias against AI-generated content, highlighting the societal challenge of improving the perception of AI work in contexts where quality assessments should be paramount.
Quantitative mode stability for the wave equation on the Kerr-Newman spacetime
Risk-Aware Objective-Based Forecasting in Inertia Management
Chainalysis: Geography of Cryptocurrency 2023
Periodicity in Cryptocurrency Volatility and Liquidity
Impact of Geometric Uncertainty on the Computation of Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Wall Strain
Simulation-based Bayesian inference with ameliorative learned summary statistics -- Part I