AUTHORING NOW THAT WE HAVE ELICIT AND CHATGPT: I use both and ChatGPT, (and once

AUTHORING NOW THAT WE HAVE ELICIT AND CHATGPT:

I use both https://t.co/V3eUVfhiXL and ChatGPT, (and once in a while https://t.co/m953qzBngk) and am unconsciously, rather than deliberately incorporating them into my workflow.

I’ve found is Elicit is a huge improvement when I’m looking for source material.

And I find ChatGPT helps with search and especially enumerating lists, dimensions, and properties, as well as … well, it preserves tone.

I’m not rapid adopter. But if I’m correct, my workflow will continue to follow this sequence:

Outline -> Topic -> Topic Sketches and Draft(s) -> Elicit(Verify, Cites etc) -> Chat GPT (sketch) -> Expand and Clarify -> Revise and improve -> Send out for review.

I know a lot of coders are finding that ChatGPT improves their productivity. And for some, it produces better code – in some cases than they might themselves.

Most content production is spam. My work is technical with very precise vocabulary. But when I’m referring to some aspect of one science or another ChatGPT does a pretty good job of outlining the concept in accessible terms.

I would love a ChatGPT that worked in my domain of expertise, but we’d have to train it ourselves. (Oddly ChatGPT can approximate my writing style somewhat if asked, to write it using my name – which is interesting.)