>>segfau+(OP)
Is it just me or does the formatting of this feel like ChatGPT (numbered lists, "Key Takeaways", and just the general phrasing of things)? It's not necessarily an issue if you checked over it properly but if you did use it then it might be good to mention that for transparency, because people can tell anyway and it might feel slightly otherwise
>>circui+s4
> might be good to mention that for transparency, because people can tell anyway and it might feel slightly otherwise
Devil's advocate: why does it matter (apart from "it feels wrong")? As long as the conclusions are sound, why is it relevant whether AI helped with the writing of the report?
>>markso+Q4
Because AI use is often a strong indicator of a lack of soundness. Especially if it's used to the point where its structural quirks (like a love for lists) shine through.