A seguirPróximo guia
Declarações de política de IA para programas de curso
Sociedade
GUIA DA SOCIEDADE
APA cites AI output with the company as author and the model as the title, for example OpenAI.
(2023). ChatGPT [Large language model]. MLA does not treat the AI as an author and puts a description of your prompt in the title position. Chicago prefers a footnote and usually no bibliography entry. Citing matters because readers can't open your chat, so the citation has to tell them which tool you used and what you asked it.
All three major styles published guidance on generative AI in 2023. They differ mainly on who or what counts as the author. APA (guidance posted on the APA Style blog in April 2023) treats the company that built the model as the author. A reference looks like this: OpenAI. (2023). ChatGPT (Mar 14 version) [Large language model]. https://chat.openai.com/chat. The in-text citation is (OpenAI, 2023). APA asks writers to describe the prompt in the text. For long responses, it suggests putting the full exchange in an appendix so readers can see what the model produced. MLA (guidance published in March 2023) says not to treat the AI as an author. The title slot gets a description of what was generated, usually the prompt in quotation marks. After that come the tool as the container, its version, the publisher, the date the content was generated, and the location. The in-text citation uses a shortened form of that title. MLA also asks writers to acknowledge non-quoted uses, such as editing help, in a note or in the text. Chicago generally cites AI output in a note. For example: 1. ChatGPT, response to "Explain how to make pizza dough from common household ingredients," OpenAI, March 7, 2023. If the prompt is already given in your text, the note can be shorter. Chicago usually leaves AI output out of the bibliography because readers can't retrieve the conversation, treating it much like a personal communication. A publicly shareable link may change that. A common misconception is that citing an AI makes its claims reliable. It doesn't. If ChatGPT describes a study, find the study and cite that instead. Another is that the style guide decides whether you can use AI at all. Your instructor's or publisher's policy decides that first.
Os danos catastróficos e diários da IA dependem de quem entende os riscos e de quem pode agir.
A literacia pública e profissional determina se uma política de segurança forte é politicamente possível.
Explicações claras reduzem a captura por exageros, relações públicas de laboratório e teatro de ética vaga.
Citation rules for AI will keep changing as the tools do. Open questions include how to cite outputs that combine several models, outputs based on live web searches, and AI features built into ordinary software like word processors. Share links and exportable transcripts may make AI output easier to retrieve, which could move styles such as Chicago toward fuller reference entries. Expect the three style guides to update their examples rather than change their basic logic.
A psychology student writes: When prompted with "Is the left-brain/right-brain divide real?" ChatGPT said the idea is largely a myth (OpenAI, 2023). The reference list then includes the OpenAI entry with the model version and URL.
An English student quotes an AI summary of a poem. In the Works Cited, the entry starts with the prompt in quotation marks, followed by ChatGPT, the version, OpenAI, the date it was generated, and the URL.
A history student adds a footnote: 1. Text generated by ChatGPT, OpenAI, March 7, 2023, https://chat.openai.com/chat. Following Chicago's usual advice, there is no bibliography entry.
A student used AI only to brainstorm and did not quote or paraphrase it. Following the course policy, they add a short disclosure note instead of a formal citation.
Tratar o risco existencial como ficção científica enquanto aumenta a capacidade.
Confundir segurança do produto de superfície com alinhamento sob alta autonomia.
Deixando o público não-inglês e não especializado com apenas fontes de baixa qualidade.
Separe os riscos de danos ao produto, uso indevido e perda de controle/desalinhamento.
Pergunte quais evidências mudariam sua visão sobre prazos e gravidade.
Prefira fontes primárias e avaliações concretas em vez de afirmações de marketing.
Identifique um caminho de ação: carreira, política, financiamento ou habilidades – não apenas conscientização.
Free newsletter
Three verified AI stories every weekday morning, written in plain English. Free forever, no ads.
One email each weekday. Unsubscribe in one click. We never sell or share your address.
Test yourself
Instant feedback on every answer, and a shareable certificate with a verifiable ID once you pass a course.
Support free AI education. AI Understanding is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit — no ads, no paywall, ever. Make a donation
APA cites AI output with the company as author and the model as the title, for example OpenAI. (2023). ChatGPT [Large language model]. MLA does not treat the AI as an author and puts a description of your prompt in the title position. Chicago prefers a footnote and usually no bibliography entry. Citing matters because readers can't open your chat, so the citation has to tell them which tool you used and what you asked it.
A APA trata a empresa que construiu o modelo como autora, como em OpenAI. (2023). ChatGPT [Modelo de linguagem grande].
O MLA não trata a IA como autora. Ele usa uma descrição do conteúdo gerado, geralmente o prompt entre aspas, como título.
Chicago geralmente cita os resultados da IA em uma nota de rodapé ou final e geralmente os deixa fora da bibliografia.
Como a conversa geralmente não pode ser recuperada, Chicago a trata como uma comunicação pessoal. Um link público pode mudar isso.
A APA sugere colocar longas trocas em um apêndice para que os leitores possam ver exatamente o que o modelo produziu.
Continue aprendendo
Mais guias escolhidos para este tópico
A seguirPróximo guia
Declarações de política de IA para programas de curso
Sociedade