A recently published article in Elseviers’ Surfaces and Interfaces^​1​ starts its introduction with the unforgettably original sentence

Certainly, here is a possible introduction for your topic:

The authors of ^​1​

and continues with a fairly generic, but well readable, probably textbook-level overview of the field of lithium batteries. While this paper is far out of my scope of expertise, preventing me from assessing its general merits — this would have been the task of the reviewers, the authors present the reader with a body of text not written by experts but rather a machine trained on producing text that sounds good. They do not disclose the use of any kind of LLM in the writing process and add to the body of uninspired and incremental writings in academia.

Stephen Fry reads a letter of Nick Cave, an australian artist, on the aspects of human creative mental power we will be missing when using ChatGPT and the like to write, draw, explain for us.

While science at times is perceived as less creative and more exact, I consider the definition of the scientific question and the thought process to answer it as an inherently creative process, which, in the exercise of explaining it requires inherent creativity.