arXiv cs.CY· Marcin Miro\'nczuk·· 12 小时前AI 评分19
当披露规则不够用：AI 辅助学术中的作者授权与判断
When disclosure rules are not enough: authorial warrant and judgment in ai-supported scholarship
AI 导读
针对生成式 AI 披露政策只关注模型是否、何处、如何被使用的问题，该研究提出负责任使用需要“主张级作者授权”，即贡献者能理解、论证并捍卫其贡献中的每一项主张。文章区分了模型输出实质影响判断的“认知委托”与不影响判断实质的“常规委托”，并将披露类别改造为面向主张的前置启发式工具，把六类常见研究功能映射到风险、监督形式与培养性问题。
正文 · 原文
Abstract:Editorial policies increasingly require authors to disclose substantive uses of generative AI, but such requirements commonly focus on whether, where, and how a model was used. Even function-specific disclosure may locate a model in the research or writing process without showing how its outputs entered scholarly judgment, how they were evaluated, or whether contributors can reconstruct the relevant reasoning and defend resulting claims without treating those outputs as sufficient justification. Drawing on research ethics, AI disclosure policy, human-model interaction, and researcher formation, this article argues that disclosure documents model use, whereas responsible use requires claim-level authorial warrant: a contributor's capacity to understand, justify, and defend claims within their contribution. The article distinguishes cognitive delegation, in which model outputs shape substantive choices, interpretations, or justifications, from routine delegation, which does not ordinarily bear on the substance of judgment. Its conceptual contribution is to link the epistemic role of outputs that shape judgment to the function-appropriate evaluation required to justify decisions and retain warrant for resulting claims. It then repurposes disclosure categories as a claim-sensitive ex ante heuristic, mapping six recurrent research functions to risks, forms of oversight, and formative questions for recognising cognitive delegation and selecting function-appropriate evaluation. The article contributes to the ethics of information technology by clarifying when AI-supported scholarship remains under responsible human judgment and when cognitive delegation threatens the epistemic basis of authorship.
| Subjects: | Computers and Society (cs.CY) |
| Cite as: | arXiv:2610.32574 [cs.CY] |
| (or arXiv:2610.32574v1 [cs.CY] for this version) | |
| https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2610.32574 arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration) |
|
| Journal reference: | Ethics and Information Technology 28, 54 (2026) |
| Related DOI: | https://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-026-09928-8
DOI(s) linking to related resources |
Submission history
From: Marcin Mirończuk [view email]
[v1]
Fri, 23 Oct 2026 13:02:51 UTC (815 KB)
来源：arXiv cs.CY · arxiv.org