Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • COMMENT

Living guidelines for generative AI — why scientists must oversee its use

Establish an independent scientific body to test and certify generative artificial intelligence, before the technology damages science and public trust.
  1. Claudi L. Bockting

    1. Claudi L. Bockting is professor of clinical psychology in psychiatry at Amsterdam UMC, Department of Psychiatry, Amsterdam Public Health, University of Amsterdam; and co-director at the Centre for Urban Mental Health at the Institute of Advanced Study, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands.

    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed  Google Scholar

  2. Eva A. M. van Dis

    1. Eva A. M. van Dis is a postdoctoral researcher and psychologist at Amsterdam UMC, Department of Psychiatry, Amsterdam Public Health, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands.

    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed  Google Scholar

  3. Robert van Rooij

    1. Robert van Rooij is director of, and professor of logic and cognition at, the Institute for Logic, Language and Computation, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands.

    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed  Google Scholar

  4. Willem Zuidema

    1. Willem Zuidema is an associate professor in natural language processing, explainable AI and cognitive modelling at the Institute for Logic, Language and Computation, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands.

    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed  Google Scholar

  5. Johan Bollen

    1. Johan Bollen is professor of informatics and cognitive science, and director of the Center for Social and Biomedical Complexity at Indiana University, Bloomington, USA.

    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed  Google Scholar

Rows of seated lawmakers raise their arms while voting

Lawmakers at the European Parliament in Strasbourg, France, voted on the draft AI Act in June. Credit: Jean-Francois Badias/Associated Press/Alamy

Nearly one year after the technology firm OpenAI released the chatbot ChatGPT, companies are in an arms race to develop ‘generative’ artificial-intelligence (AI) systems that are ever more powerful. Each version adds capabilities that increasingly encroach on human skills. By producing text, images, videos and even computer programs in response to human prompts, generative AI systems can make information more accessible and speed up technology development. Yet they also pose risks.

Access options

Rent or buy this article

Prices vary by article type

from$1.95

to$39.95

Learn more

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Nature 622, 693-696 (2023)

doi: https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-023-03266-1

A full list of guideline co-developers’ affiliations accompanies this Comment in the Supplementary information.

References

  1. van Dis, E. A. M., Bollen, J., Zuidema, W., van Rooij, R. & Bockting, C. L. Nature 614, 224–226 (2023).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Jung, J. C. & Sharon, E. Glob. Bus. Organ. Excel. 38, 6–15 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Kidd, C. & Birhane, A. Science 380, 1222–1223 (2023).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. US National Institute of Standards and Technology. Artificial Intelligence Risk Management Framework (AI RMF 1.0) Report No. NIST AI 100-1 (NIST, 2023).

    Google Scholar 

  5. Elliott, J. et al. Nature 600, 383–385 (2021).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Nosek, B. A. et al. Science 348, 1422–1425 (2015).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. De Jonge, P. & Bockting, C. L. N. Engl. J. Med. 358, 2180–2182 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Bekelman, J. E., Li, Y. & Gross, C. P. JAMA 289, 454–465 (2003).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Lo, B. & Field, M. J. (eds). Conflict of Interest in Medical Research, Education, and Practice (National Academies Press, 2009).

    Google Scholar 

  10. Quach, K. ‘Thanks to generative AI, catching fraud science is going to be this much harder’ The Register (11 March 2023).

  11. Gu, J. et al. Patterns 3, 100511 (2022).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Samuelson, P. Science 381, 158–161 (2023).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Krügel, S., Ostermaier, A. & Uhl, M. Sci. Rep. 13, 4569 (2023).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Supplementary Information

  1. Guideline co-developers and affiliations

Competing Interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Subjects

Latest on:

Nature Careers

Jobs

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing

Search

Advanced search

Quick links