We've all used LLMs. It was certainly somebody using Claude.

"We gave Claude a prompt to search through a massive database of DNA sequences for interesting new examples of RTs. Our involvement was limited to the initial prompt and the lab work, while Claude agents combed through the database, investigated the distinct RT families, and used their own judgement to identify interesting candidates. After 21 hours spent searching this data by roughly 950 agents using 210 million tokens, one of the agents spotted something remarkable: a repeating pattern of DNA sequences that occurs next to the gene for an odd-looking RT. After further analysis and testing in our lab, we recognized that this pattern marked a previously uncharacterized enzyme system found in bacteriophages (the viruses that infect bacteria) that we call array-associated reverse transcriptases (ART)."

I find this to be a convenient distinction going around recently. Not making a judgement on your comment. Just generally:

- a person demoing something they made

  - "we should say this is authored by Claude."

- a demonstration of something achieved with the assistance of llms

  - "we should say this was a human directing Claude"

If somebody shares something "they did", they get a million comments criticising them because actually Claude did it.

If someone shares something "Claude did", they get the opposite.

You can't win.