Professor and Co-Director of the Center for Digital Narrative at the University of Bergen
Professor and Co-Director of the Center for Digital Narrative at the University of Bergen
My very helpful librarian sent me a link to an author’s addendum for those contracts where you sign away your rights to publish your own article online. So next time a publisher sends me a contract, I can sign it and attach my copy of this addendum, making the contract palatable to me! Hooray! [edit: snipped grumpy unnecessary bit]
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
My colleague Jessica Witte has just shared a preprint where she compared the emotional arcs of the stories we generated using gpt-4o-mini to those of human-authored (pre-2022) stories from the subreddit r/WritingPrompts, conveniently gathered in this dataset. She found a distinct difference in the endings of the LLM-generated stories: both […]
Dorothy Bishop, a psychologist, wrote a useful list of what reviewers need to look out now that so many papers are bad science that looks good thanks to LLMs. Read her whole blog post, she explains it well, but here’s a brief version because I’m pretty sure we’ll be needing […]
I recently read a good article on the different kinds of truth a language model operates with by Luke Mann, Liam Magee and Vanicka Arora, Truth Machines: Synthesizing Veracity in AI Language Models, but despite its lovely typology of truths (consensus, correspondence, coherence and pragmatic) it doesn’t help me with […]
I have this hunch that sparkles and glow and shimmer are somehow a point in the latent spaces of LLMs that have more connections than you would expect. Perhaps their connotation to magic and to the unknown matches some of the mystique of genAI? Or perhaps these words are used […]
This LLM-generated paper demonstrates how LLMs fail to cite core scholarship on a topic but generate misaligned citations systematically.
This paper is a great example of why you probably shouldn’t use a systematic literature review for a theoretical and conceptual research question like “How does artificial intelligence affect the perception of authenticity and aura in art?” However, if you’re looking for an annotated list of 48 recent articles about […]
noah
Of course, sometimes the editor will do the negotiation ahead of time, on behalf of all contributors. You weren’t unhappy with any of the First Person agreement, were you?
Jill
Not at the time, I thought the First Person agreement was great! I still think it’s pretty good, though I’m not sure that it allows me to archive the my chapter in BORA. I actually emailed the MIT Press person named on the contract I signed just the other day to ask whether BORA archiving would be OK with them, and I expect they’ll answer.
And at the time it had never occurred to me that I’d want to archive the thing in BORA…
I should add that I really appreciate the work that editors do with publications. I probably sounded more gumpry in that post than I really am about it – I love seeing my work in print 🙂
noah
I’d be very surprised if there was any problem. I mean, the MITP folks would need to somehow construe BORA as an “edited volume.” I don’t think it makes any sense to call open access archives edited volumes, but since you’re checking on this issue it means that other contributors won’t have to.
Jill
I had a reply back today from MIT Press, saying they were quite happy for me to archive the First Person article in BORA; and that they’d appreciate me waiting six months after the publication of Second Person before putting my contribution to that book there, but after that it would be fine.
So yes, I’m happy with MIT Press 🙂
Eric
Thanks for posting this. Now, if I only had more articles ready for publication…