If anything it should go in the acknowledgments section, not the author list. Would you list grammarly as a coauthor?
> “An attribution of authorship carries with it accountability for the work, which cannot be effectively applied to LLMs,” says Magdalena Skipper, editor-in-chief of Nature in London. Authors using LLMs in any way while developing a paper should document their use in the methods or acknowledgements sections, if appropriate, she says.
It's interesting that ChatGPT feels more human so we're more likely to anthropomorphise it, like list it as a coauthor.
Authorship is supposed to be for intellectual contribution. If LLMs get good enough to start identifying weaknesses in my methods section or suggesting novel analyses to answer scientific questions, then maybe I’ll reconsider my view
Though there’s still the argument made in this article that authors should be able to take responsibility for the work, which under our current legal framework programs can’t do