Don't Credit the LLM
Isaac Su challenges the growing habit of crediting LLMs for work, arguing that tools deserve no credit and that doing so dilutes personal accountability. He explores why people disclose LLM use—from imposter syndrome to mandated adoption—and insists that creators should take full credit for successes and full responsibility for failures.
A tool can only take as much credit as it can be held accountable for, so crediting it inadvertently dilutes your own accountability for the work.
- NitpickLawyer
> Why did I need to know that?
In a perfect world such a disclaimer would help anyone reading the output by setting expectations. We each have different experiences with this, and different levels of acceptance. Knowing that something is using generated content can help anyone either accept / skim / thoroughly review something.
The problem is that we're seeing lots of backlash, often for ideological reasons, or for outdated somewhat technical reasons, so people have less of an incentive to be honest, and tons of incentives to hide their use.
- chias
There is a difference between crediting the LLM (which i agree is silly) and disclosing the use of an LLM, which I think is important. The author seems to conflate these two.
A disclosure is appropriate whenever the reader might feel differently about the result of armed with this information. For example, "this research on the non-addictive nature of tobacco, funded by the tobacco industry".
Moreover, not citing the LLM is plagiarism. Maybe people outside academia have an oddly narrow understanding of plagiarism, and (for example) cannot understand how it is possible to plagiarize yourself. It is hard to explain the importance of citing LLM contributions to people with this view.
- minimaxir
> 1. You believe in ascribing credit where credit is due. Using an LLM feels like cheating so disclosing it makes you feel less like an imposter for having produced something amazing.
Cheating isn't the right word here. Crediting LLMs is about giving everyone involved accurate information which can be used for later decision making (e.g. if something unexpected happens as a result of a LLM-ism).
- grayclhn
This is a little silly — if I quote a large passage from an encyclopedia (or whatever), I cite the source. If I use an LLM to write some of a paper or report, I’m not writing that part (even if I edit it or rephrase it or whatever) so I’d better credit the LLM in whatever way is most consistent with how its output is being presented in the paper.
- yuliyp
An LLM is not me. It is capable of doing more "work" but it also doesn't have my mental models and experience. My colleagues know roughly my areas of expertise. If I say "I think that X is happening" they'll assume that is the result of my expertise being applied and react accordingly. If I say "[LLM] thinks X is happening" they'll react differently and I want them to. Just like I might say "I suspect X is happening because Y" or "X is definitely happening" when I want to modulate their trust in what I'm saying.