Ümit Hoca YDS-YÖKDİL-EYDS-YDT

sınvda biraz kısa formunu gördük.:
A report in Science explains that a research initiative is attempting to develop standards for the use of text generating artificial intelligence (AI) in research papers published in peer-reviewed journals. According to the article, “4,000 researchers from a variety of disciplines and countries will weigh in on guidelines that could be adopted widely across academic publishing, which has been grappling with chatbots and other AI issues for the past year and a half. The group behind the effort wants to replace the piecemeal landscape of current guidelines with a single set of standards that represents a consensus of the research community. The initiative is a partnership between researchers and publishers as well as industry body the Committee on Publication Ethics. The group hopes to release a final set of guidelines by August, which will be updated every year because of the ‘fast evolving nature of this technology. Additionally, the guidelines will include, a list of ways authors should not use the large language models (LLMs) that power chatbots and how they should disclose other uses. Since generative AI tools such as ChatGPT became public in late 2022, publishers and researchers have debated these issues. Some say the tools can help draft manuscripts if used responsibly — by authors who do not have English as their first language, for example. Others fear scientific fraudsters will use them to publish convincing but fake work quickly. LLMs’ propensity to make things up, combined with their relative fluency in writing and an overburdened peer-review system, ‘poses a grave threat to scientific research and publishing,’ stated Tanya De Villiers-Botha, a philosopher at Stellenbosch University,” according to Science. Journals such as Science and Nature have published, “rules about how scientists can use generative AI tools in their work. Those policies often state that AI tools cannot be authors because they cannot be accountable for the work. They also require authors to declare where the tools have been used.”

A report in Science explains that a research initiative (CANGARU) is attempting to develop standards for the use of text generating artificial intelligence (AI) in research papers published in peer-reviewed journals. According to the article, “4,000 researchers from a variety of disciplines and countries will weigh in on guidelines that could be adopted widely across academic publishing, which has been grappling with chatbots and other AI issues for the past year and a half. The group behind the effort wants to replace the piecemeal landscape of current guidelines with a single set of standards that represents a consensus of the research community. [The] initiative is a partnership between researchers and publishers including Elsevier, Springer Nature, Wiley; representatives from journals eLife, Cell, and The BMJ; as well as industry body the Committee on Publication Ethics. The group hopes to release a final set of guidelines by August, which will be updated every year because of the ‘fast evolving nature of this technology, ’[said] Giovanni Cacciamani, a urologist at the University of Southern California who leads CANGARU,” according to Science. Additionally, the guidelines will include, “a list of ways authors should not use the large language models (LLMs) that power chatbots and how they should disclose other uses. Since generative AI tools such as ChatGPT became public in late 2022, publishers and researchers have debated these issues. Some say the tools can help draft manuscripts if used responsibly — by authors who do not have English as their first language, for example. Others fear scientific fraudsters will use them to publish convincing but fake work quickly. LLMs’ propensity to make things up, combined with their relative fluency in writing and an overburdened peer-review system, ‘poses a grave threat to scientific research and publishing,’ stated Tanya De Villiers-Botha, a philosopher at Stellenbosch University,” according to Science. Journals such as Science and Nature have published, “rules about how scientists can use generative AI tools in their work. Those policies often state that AI tools cannot be authors because they cannot be accountable for the work. They also require authors to declare where the tools have been used.”
Kaynak
https://iwebb.carterbloodcare.org/Memo/DownloadFile/9841
Erdi hocama teşekkürler

Arkadaşlar 14 Şubat 2026
#eyds
’den bir paragraf.
Ağırlıklı C1 seviyesinde bazı bölümler C2.
Bu Metni Anlamak İçin Bilinmesi Gereken Dilbilgisi Konuları
1. Relative Clauses (Sıfat Cümlecikleri) ve Kısaltmaları (Reduction)
Metin boyunca isimleri niteleyen çok sayıda karmaşık sıfat cümleciği var.
• Örnek: "...guidelines that could be adopted widely..."
• Örnek: "...academic publishing, which has been grappling with..."
• Kısaltma (Reduction) Örneği: "...research papers [which are] published in peer-reviewed journals." (Burada which are düşmüş, doğrudan V3 ile kısaltma yapılmıştır).
2. Passive Voice (Edilgen Yapı)
Akademik ve resmi metinlerin temel taşıdır. Çeşitli zamanlarda ve modallarla birlikte kullanılmıştır.
• Örnek (Modal + Passive): "...guidelines that could be adopted..."
• Örnek (Future Passive): "...which will be updated every year..."
3. Noun Clauses (İsim Cümlecikleri) ve Reported Speech (Dolaylı Anlatım)
• Örnek: "A report... explains that a research initiative... is attempting..."
• Örnek: "...how they should disclose other uses." (Buradaki how ile başlayan kısım bir isim cümleciğidir).
4. Gerunds/Infinitives
• Örnek (Infinitive): "...attempting to develop..."
• Örnek (Participle Clause): "LLMs' propensity to make things up, combined with their relative fluency..., poses a grave threat..." (Burada iki virgül arasındaki bölüm özneyi niteleyen bir ortaç yapısıdır).
5. Reduced Conditionals (Kısaltılmış Koşul Cümleleri)
• Örnek: "Some say the tools can help draft manuscripts if [they are] used responsibly..." (If'ten sonraki özne ve 'to be' fiili atılarak kısaltma yapılmış).
Kelime bilgisi olarak böyle kelimelere ne kadar hekimsiniz
C1 Seviyesi Kelimeler
Bunlar ileri akademik metinlerde sık görülen ama uzmanlık gerektirmeyen kelimelerdir:
•research initiative
•attempt
•standard
•peer-reviewed
•guidelines
•adopt
•academic publishing
•replace
•consensus
•partnership
•representative
•release
•updated
•evolving
•disclose
•debated
•draft manuscripts
•fraudsters
•convincing
•accountable
•declare
C2 Seviyesi Kelimeler / İfadeler
•piecemeal landscape
•grappling with
•represents a consensus of the research community
•fast-evolving nature
•propensity (özellikle: LLMs’ propensity to make things up)
•relative fluency
•overburdened peer-review system
•poses a grave threat
•publication ethics
•accountable for the work

14 Şubat 2026
#eyds
detaylı değerlendirme
https://youtu.be/lRlFxrxFdmg?si=ScsCo1XxHZATCbNt

Arkadaşlar merhaba, Şubat 2026
#eyds
gerçekten zor bir sınav oldu, hedefine ulaşan arkadaşları tebrik ediyorum.Hedefine ulaşamayan arkadaşlar moral ve motivasyonunuzu bozmamadan çalışmaya devam; Cimer başvurusu ile yanlışlarınızı öğrenip benimle paylaşmanızı bekliyorum. Sınav sonrası çok fazla mesaj ve telefon alıyorum, yoğunluktan mesaj ve telefonlarınıza geri dönüşlerde gecikebilirim. Hafta içi tüm mesaj ve aramalara dönüş yapacağım.

14 Şubat
#eyds
değerlendirmesi

Ben nerede yanlış yaptım? Cimer başvurunuzu yapıp hatalarınızı analiz etmeyin unutmayın.
#eyds
#yds
#yökdil

ÖSYM Sevgililer Gününe sevgilisiz girmiş sanırım. Bu kadar zor sınav olur mu?
#EYDS
Olası cevapları vereyim.
resilience
sparingly
intervention
revert to
transmitted
immersive
Having V3 → to V1
being constructed → attempted
until had V3 → could have V3
Rather than
That’s
Given that
Even if
three times as … as
foundation for / in
with / among