close
Skip to main content
akimikaa u/akimikaa avatar

mikachuuu

u/akimikaa

Feed options
Hot
New
Top
View
Card
Compact

Using tools to implement parts of a research project doesn’t mean the research magically did itself. I’m responsible for the methodology, review, validation, and conclusions.


soon I’ll need an AI to audit the AI that audits the AI


thank you! i love this game so much and i love the community. i also love research and data so i thought it would be cool to actually have some concrete answers


A fair bit lol. codex helps me build the tooling and crunch the boring parts, i review the data and make the actual research decisions.


Appreciate that!. I’m more interested in where AI assistance is useful, where it becomes risky, and whether we can actually measure that instead of arguing from “vibes” no pun intended lol


I think a lot of people who treat any AI assistance as proof someone can’t code have a pretty unrealistic idea of how software development actually works. Professional dev is full of tools, abstractions, autocomplete, linters, docs, code review, Stack Overflow, Copilot, internal tooling, and other forms of assistance. The skill is understanding, reviewing, testing, and taking responsibility for what you ship.


I know about as much as you do right now. Phase 1 only looks at publicly stated AI assistance in Workshop descriptions, so I can identify disclosed cases, but I haven’t inspected the actual source code yet.
Once I start analyzing the code, I’ll be able to say more about things like structure, testing, complexity, and whether those mods are actually any good.


Mostly OpenAI Codex for the implementation work, with ChatGPT helping me think through the methodology, edge cases, and analysis. I’m still doing the review/validation myself especially anything that affects the research conclusions.