Google Geminiはデフォルト設定では、ChatGPT3.5やChatGPT4と同じく、参考資料を挙げません。そのため参考資料を知るためには、「有益な参考資料を挙げてください。」といった趣旨のプロンプト文を追加で与える必要があります。 そうした回答結果の一例は下記の通り、Microsoft Copilotよりもかなり有益でした。この回答結果を見ると、Google Geminiは自社のGoogle検索エンジンを利用して、有益な参考資料を挙げるとともに、URLの有効・無効をチェックし、無効なURLを削除する設定になっているようです。
また、移民問題に関する最新の研究やデータを探している場合は、Pew Research CenterやNikkei Asiaなどの信頼できる情報源を参照すると良いでしょう。¹,² これらのサイトでは、移民問題に関する深い分析や統計データが提供されています。幅広い視点から移民問題を理解するために役立つでしょう。
– タイトル: Japan immigration: News & Insights – Nikkei Asia – 内容: このページは、日本の移民問題に関する最新のニュースや分析を集めたもので、日本が移民政策の強化に取り組む中での課題や、外国人労働者の受け入れ拡大、技術研修生の問題、難民申請者の扱いなど、様々なトピックについての記事が掲載されています。例えば、日本が外国人労働者の受け入れを拡大するための新しい外国人労働者プログラムの開始、全ての外国人居住者を国民年金制度に登録するための規制強化、亡命希望者に対する新しい強制送還規則の導入などが話題になっています。 – URL: [Nikkei Asia – Japan immigration](^1^)
Nikkei Asiaの記事「Japan greenlights longer stays for more skilled foreign workers」は、日本の高度外国人材に対する在留資格「特定技能2号」の対象職種を拡大し、より多くの外国人労働者が永住権を取得できる道を開いたことを報じています。
例によってではあるが、アラレちゃん型AIであるChatGPT4oが挙げる参考資料の書誌情報は、正しいものと間違っているものとが混在していることが多い。例えば、“The Making of the Atomic Bomb” by Richard Rhodes (1986)はRhodes, R. (1986). The making of the atomic bomb. New York: Simon & Schuster.を指すものとして正しいが、“Atomic Energy: A New Start” by Philip Sporn (1976)は、Lilienthal, D.E.(1980)Atomic Energy: A New Start ,Harper & Rowの間違いである。 ChatGPT4oを利用する場合には、こうしたことをよく理解して対応する必要がある。（ただし、レポートを採点する教員の側から言えば、生成AIが「間違った参考資料の書誌情報」を与えた方が採点しやすい。すなわち、学生に対して「生成AIの回答をそのままコピペした場合には不可評価とする」と通知した上で、それでもなお書誌情報に関する生成AIの回答をそのままコピペしてレポート課題を学生に対して教育的指導を徹底することが教育的意味を持つと思われる。）
“Atomic Energy: A New Start” by Philip Sporn (1976) 原子力発電の初期の推進論について詳述。
“The Making of the Atomic Bomb” by Richard Rhodes (1986) 原子力技術の発展とその社会的影響について包括的に記述。
“Nuclear Fear: A History of Images” by Spencer R. Weart (1988) 原子力に対する社会的イメージと恐怖についての歴史的な分析。
Academic Papers
“The Politics of Nuclear Energy in Western Europe” by Wolfgang C. Müller and Paul W. Thurner (2017) 欧州における原子力政策と政治的影響について。
“Public Attitudes toward Nuclear Power: The Role of Public Knowledge and Trust” by Hank C. Jenkins-Smith, Kerry G. Herron, and Carol L. Silva (2011) 米国における原子力に対する公衆の態度と信頼の役割についての研究。
“Nuclear Power and Sustainable Development” by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) (2006) 原子力発電が持続可能な発展に与える影響についての包括的な分析。
Reports and Policy Papers
“World Nuclear Industry Status Report” (Annual) by Mycle Schneider and Antony Froggatt 世界の原子力産業の現状と展望についての最新情報。
“The Future of Nuclear Energy in a Carbon-Constrained World” by the MIT Energy Initiative (2018) 炭素制約のある世界における原子力エネルギーの未来についての詳細な報告書。
“Nuclear Power and Public Policy: The Social and Ethical Problems of Fission Technology” by Kristin Shrader-Frechette (1983) 核分裂技術の社会的および倫理的問題についての政策論。
Rhodes, R. (1986). The making of the atomic bomb. New York: Simon & Schuster.
Weart, S. R. (1988). Nuclear fear: A history of images. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Müller, W. C., & Thurner, P. W. (2017). The politics of nuclear energy in Western Europe. Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, 7(4), 555-567.
Jenkins-Smith, H. C., Herron, K. G., & Silva, C. L. (2011). Public attitudes toward nuclear power: The role of public knowledge and trust. Energy Policy, 39(9), 4663-4670.
International Atomic Energy Agency. (2006). Nuclear power and sustainable development. Vienna: IAEA.
Schneider, M., & Froggatt, A. (Eds.). (Annual). World nuclear industry status report. Paris: Mycle Schneider Consulting.
MIT Energy Initiative. (2018). The future of nuclear energy in a carbon-constrained world. Cambridge, MA: Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
Shrader-Frechette, K. (1983). Nuclear power and public policy: The social and ethical problems of fission technology. Dordrecht: Reidel.
Please introduce any books, journals or other academic sources related to the above answers. Furthermore, please indicate the bibliographic information of those reference materials in APA style.
サンプル2
第1回目 Please introduce any books, journals or other academic sources related to the above answers.
第2回目 Furthermore, please indicate the bibliographic information of those reference materials in APA style.
以下、ChatGPT4oの回答
Certainly! Here is the bibliographic information for the mentioned sources in APA style:
Books
Calder, N. (1979). Nuclear politics: The history of atomic energy. Viking Press.
This book provides a comprehensive history of nuclear power, including the political and economic motivations behind its development.
Fermi, L. (1968). The atomic age: Scientists in national and world affairs. Basic Books.
Laura Fermi, the wife of physicist Enrico Fermi, offers a unique perspective on the early atomic age, discussing both the scientific breakthroughs and the political implications.
Wolfson, R. (1993). Nuclear choices: A citizen’s guide to nuclear technology. MIT Press.
This guide explains the science and technology behind nuclear power and its implications for society, including historical context and policy considerations.
Hewlett, R. G., & Holl, J. M. (1989). Atoms for peace and war, 1953-1961: Eisenhower and the Atomic Energy Commission. University of California Press.
This detailed historical account examines Eisenhower’s “Atoms for Peace” initiative and its impact on the development of civilian nuclear power.
Weart, S. R. (2012). The rise of nuclear fear. Harvard University Press.
Weart explores the cultural and social dimensions of nuclear technology, including public perception and the interplay between nuclear power and nuclear weapons.
Journals
Journal of Nuclear Science and Technology. (Various issues).
This journal publishes research articles on all aspects of nuclear science and technology, including reactor design, safety, and policy issues.
Energy Policy. (Various issues).
This interdisciplinary journal covers energy policy and economics, including articles on the historical development and future prospects of nuclear power.
Nuclear Technology. (Various issues).
The journal focuses on the practical and theoretical aspects of nuclear technology, including reactor design, safety, and environmental impact.
Historical Studies in the Natural Sciences. (Various issues).
This journal includes articles on the history of nuclear science and technology, providing a scholarly context for understanding the development of civilian nuclear power.
The Nonproliferation Review. (Various issues).
While focused on nonproliferation, this journal also covers issues related to nuclear energy policy and the historical context of nuclear development.
Academic Sources and Articles
Krige, J. (2006). Atoms for peace and the nuclear energy business. Technology and Culture, 47(4), 839-859. doi:10.1353/tech.2006.0248
Published in “Technology and Culture,” this article examines the impact of Eisenhower’s Atoms for Peace program on the nuclear energy industry.
Larkham, P. J. (1996). The birth of nuclear power in the UK: Calder Hall, 1956. Planning Perspectives, 11(1), 41-59. doi:10.1080/026654396364664
This article in “Planning Perspectives” provides a detailed account of the development and significance of the UK’s first commercial nuclear power station.
Kikkawa, T. (1996). Energy security and the role of nuclear power: The Japanese experience. Energy Studies Review, 8(2), 146-154.
Published in “Energy Studies Review,” this article discusses Japan’s post-war energy policy and the role of nuclear power in achieving energy security.
MacKerron, G. (1985). French nuclear power: The political economy of atomic energy. International Affairs, 61(2), 329-341. doi:10.2307/2618415
This article in “International Affairs” explores the political and economic factors behind France’s ambitious nuclear power program.
Trachtenberg, M. (1991). The origins of U.S. nuclear strategy, 1945-1953. Princeton University Press.
This book delves into the early strategic thinking around nuclear power and its dual-use potential for both energy and military applications.
These references should provide a solid foundation for further research on the historical development and debates surrounding civilian nuclear power.
ここではレポート作成作業において「生成AIがどの程度まで使えるのか？」「どのように使うと良いのか？」に関して、「原子力の社会的利用をめぐる推進論と批判論の歴史的展開」（Historical Development of Arguments for and against Civilian/Non-Military Use of Nuclear power）課題を例に取り、具体的に詳しく見ていくことにしよう。
そうしたことが実際にどうであるのかに関して、「原子力の社会的利用をめぐる推進論と批判論の歴史的展開」という日本語で与えた場合と、”Historical Development of Arguments for and against Civilian/Non-Military Use of Nuclear power”という英語文で与えた場合を例にとり、見ていくことにしよう。
The debate over the civilian, non-military use of nuclear power has evolved significantly since the mid-20th century. Here is an overview of the key arguments for and against nuclear power over time:
Arguments for Civilian Use of Nuclear Power
1950s-1960s: The Early Optimism
Energy Independence: In the aftermath of World War II, many countries saw nuclear power as a means to achieve energy independence, reducing reliance on foreign oil and coal.
Technological Progress: The success of the Manhattan Project and subsequent nuclear research fostered a belief in the potential of atomic energy to revolutionize power generation.
Economic Growth: Nuclear power was seen as a way to provide cheap, abundant electricity, spurring economic growth and industrial development.
Environmental Benefits: Compared to coal and oil, nuclear power was perceived as a cleaner option, with no emissions of air pollutants or greenhouse gases.
1970s-1980s: The Expansion and Safety Reassurance
1. Energy Security: The oil crises of the 1970s underscored the need for reliable, domestic energy sources, bolstering support for nuclear power.
Technological Improvements: Advances in reactor design and safety protocols aimed to address early concerns about nuclear accidents and waste management.
Economic Competitiveness: As energy demand continued to rise, nuclear power was promoted as a cost-effective solution for large-scale electricity production.
International Cooperation: Countries began to share technology and expertise through organizations like the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), promoting nuclear power as a global solution.
1990s-2000s: The Environmental and Technological Renaissance
Climate Change Mitigation: Growing awareness of climate change highlighted nuclear power as a low-carbon energy source, crucial for reducing greenhouse gas emissions.
Energy Diversification: Diversifying energy portfolios with nuclear power was seen as a way to enhance grid stability and reduce vulnerability to fuel price volatility.
Advances in Safety and Efficiency: The development of new reactor designs, such as Generation III and IV reactors, promised enhanced safety, efficiency, and reduced waste production.
Nuclear Renaissance: Some countries, especially in Asia, experienced a resurgence of interest and investment in nuclear power as part of their energy strategy.
Arguments against Civilian Use of Nuclear Power
1950s-1960s: Early Skepticism and Fears
Safety Concerns: The potential for catastrophic accidents, such as reactor meltdowns, was a major worry from the outset.
Nuclear Proliferation: The spread of nuclear technology raised fears about its potential use for nuclear weapons development.
Waste Management: The long-term disposal of radioactive waste posed unresolved technical and environmental challenges.
Public Perception: Public fear and opposition were significant, influenced by the association of nuclear power with nuclear weapons and radiation hazards.
1970s-1980s: Accidents and Growing Opposition
High-Profile Accidents: Incidents like the Three Mile Island accident (1979) and the Chernobyl disaster (1986) intensified public fear and skepticism about nuclear safety.
Environmental Impact: Concerns about the environmental impact of uranium mining, thermal pollution from reactors, and radioactive waste disposal grew.
Economic Costs: The high costs of building, maintaining, and decommissioning nuclear plants, along with liability issues, made nuclear power less economically attractive.
Alternatives Emergence: The rise of renewable energy technologies, such as solar and wind power, offered safer, cleaner alternatives to nuclear energy.
1990s-2000s: Persistent Challenges and New Threats
Waste Disposal Issues: Long-term solutions for high-level radioactive waste remained elusive, with political and technical hurdles preventing the establishment of permanent disposal sites.
Nuclear Accidents: The Fukushima Daiichi disaster (2011) reinforced concerns about nuclear safety, particularly in the context of natural disasters.
Nuclear Security: The threat of terrorism and the security of nuclear materials became prominent concerns, raising questions about the vulnerability of nuclear facilities.
Economic Viability: As the costs of renewable energy technologies continued to fall, nuclear power faced increasing competition and questions about its economic sustainability.
Current Trends and Future Prospects
Advanced Reactors: New designs, such as small modular reactors (SMRs) and thorium reactors, aim to address safety, waste, and economic issues, potentially revitalizing the nuclear industry.
Climate Imperative: The urgent need to combat climate change keeps nuclear power in the discussion as a necessary component of a low-carbon energy mix.
Public Opinion: Public acceptance remains divided, influenced by historical accidents, economic considerations, and evolving perceptions of environmental impact.
Policy and Regulation: Government policies, international agreements, and regulatory frameworks will play crucial roles in shaping the future of civilian nuclear power.
The arguments for and against the civilian use of nuclear power have evolved with technological advances, environmental considerations, economic factors, and public perceptions. The balance of these arguments will continue to shape the role of nuclear power in the global energy landscape.
生成AIに対するプロンプト文を、「原子力の社会的利用をめぐる推進論と批判論の歴史的展開」という日本語で与えた場合と、”Historical Development of Arguments for and against Civilian/Non-Military Use of Nuclear power”という英語文で与えた場合の比較に関して、Perplexity AI(Claude 3 Opus)で試したところ、下記のように、ChatGPT4oの場合とはかなり異なる結果となった。
The historical development of arguments for and against the civilian or non-military use of nuclear power has evolved significantly since the end of World War II. This evolution can be traced through various phases, reflecting changes in technological capabilities, political contexts, and public perceptions.
Early Enthusiasm and Legislative Foundations (1940s-1950s)
Proponents’ Arguments
After World War II, there was significant enthusiasm for the peaceful applications of nuclear energy. The Atomic Energy Act of 1946 marked a pivotal moment by transferring control of nuclear technology from military to civilian hands, establishing the Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) to oversee both military and civilian uses of nuclear energy[3][7]. Proponents argued that nuclear power could revolutionize energy production, offering a virtually limitless and clean energy source. President Dwight D. Eisenhower’s “Atoms for Peace” speech in 1953 encapsulated this optimism, suggesting that nuclear energy could be a boon for humanity if harnessed for peaceful purposes[1][10].
Opponents’ Concerns
Despite the optimism, there were early concerns about the potential risks associated with nuclear power. Critics worried about the safety of nuclear reactors, the potential for accidents, and the long-term management of radioactive waste. The Atomic Energy Act of 1954, which aimed to promote the commercial use of nuclear power, also included provisions for public health and safety, reflecting these concerns[1][11].
Expansion and Controversy (1960s-1980s)
Proponents’ Arguments
During the 1960s and 1970s, nuclear power was seen as a solution to the growing energy demands and a way to reduce dependence on fossil fuels. The construction of numerous nuclear power plants during this period was driven by the belief that nuclear energy could provide a stable and reliable source of electricity. Proponents highlighted the environmental benefits of nuclear power, particularly its low greenhouse gas emissions compared to coal and oil[2][4].
Opponents’ Concerns
However, the expansion of nuclear power also sparked significant opposition. The anti-nuclear movement gained momentum, particularly after high-profile accidents such as the Three Mile Island incident in 1979 and the Chernobyl disaster in 1986. These events underscored the potential for catastrophic accidents and heightened public fears about nuclear safety. Critics also pointed to the high costs and long construction times of nuclear plants, as well as the unresolved issue of nuclear waste disposal[2][6][8].
Renewed Interest and Ongoing Debate (1990s-Present)
Proponents’ Arguments
In recent decades, the debate over nuclear power has been influenced by concerns about climate change and the need for low-carbon energy sources. Proponents argue that nuclear power is essential for reducing carbon emissions and achieving energy security. They emphasize the advancements in reactor technology that have improved safety and efficiency, and they advocate for the use of nuclear power as part of a diversified energy strategy to combat global warming[4][10].
Opponents’ Concerns
Despite these arguments, opposition to nuclear power remains strong. Critics continue to highlight the risks of nuclear accidents, the challenges of radioactive waste management, and the potential for nuclear proliferation. They argue that the high costs and long lead times for building new nuclear plants make it an impractical solution compared to renewable energy sources like wind and solar power. Additionally, concerns about the security of nuclear facilities and the potential for terrorist attacks add to the opposition[4][6][9].
Conclusion
The historical development of arguments for and against the civilian use of nuclear power reflects a complex interplay of technological, political, and social factors. While nuclear power has the potential to provide significant environmental and energy security benefits, it also poses substantial risks and challenges that continue to fuel a vigorous and ongoing debate.
これに対して同語句の英訳であるHistorical Development of Arguments for and against Civilian/Non-Military Use of Nuclear powerという12words(94文字,Civilian/Non-Militaryも1word扱い)の英語文では、下記の図に示されているように、18トークンと、日本語の場合の約半分のトークン数となっている。 なお下図の色分けは、前置詞の「of」、「for」、「against」、接続詞の「and」だけでなく、「Development」、「Arguments」、「Nuclear」、「Power」といった単語が1wordで1トークンとなっていること、および、「Historical」や「Civilian」といった形容詞語句が1wordで２トークンとなっていることを示している。
Your translation is quite accurate and conveys the intended meaning well. However, it can be refined for better clarity and flow. Here’s a revised version with detailed explanations for the changes:
Revised Translation:
Historical Development of Advocacy and Criticism Regarding the Social Use of Nuclear Energy
Reasons for Changes:
“Promotional and Critical Arguments” to “Advocacy and Criticism”:
“Promotional” is correct but can sound a bit formal and broad. “Advocacy” captures the active support and promotion aspect more naturally.
“Critical Arguments” is accurate, but “Criticism” is more straightforward and commonly used in this context.
“Regarding” instead of “for”:
“Regarding” is more precise when discussing the subject of a debate or discussion.
These changes help to make the title clearer and more aligned with common academic and professional terminology.
Historical Development of Arguments for and against the Social Use of Nuclear Energy
修正理由
“Promotional and Critical Arguments” の部分 “Promotional” は少し硬い表現で、学術的な文脈以外ではあまり使われません。また、”Critical” だけでは、どのような批判なのかが不明瞭です。そこで、より一般的な “Arguments for and against” に変更しました。これは「賛成と反対の議論」という意味で、より中立的で包括的な表現になります。
その他の注意点
“Social Use” の部分 原子力の利用は、発電だけでなく、医療、工業など多岐にわたります。もし文脈が発電に限定される場合は、”Social Use of Nuclear Energy” の代わりに “Nuclear Power Generation” や “Nuclear Energy for Electricity” など、より具体的な表現を使うことも可能です。
Microsoft Copilot AIの「より創造的に」モードの回答は、「Adovocay」＝「推進論」の反対語として、「Critique」という単語を挙げている。しかしながらこれはあまり適切ではない。
「Critique」という単語の日本語的ニュアンスは、「反対する」という意味での「批判」ではなく、「吟味する」という意味での「批評」・「論評」・「評論」といった意味合いである。例えばカントの『純粋理性批判』(Die Kritik der reinen Vernunft)という本のタイトルの英語訳はThe Critique of Pure Reasonであるが、カントは『純粋理性批判』において「純粋理性」に「反対」しているわけではない。 またコリンズ英語辞書は、Critiqueの意味を「a written examination and judgment of a situation or of a person’s work or ideas」（状況、作業、アイデアについての考察・判断に関する文章）としている。 なおMicrosoft Copilotそれ自身でも、「より厳密に」モードで「advocacyの反対語を教えてください。」と訊くと、下記のような回答となっているのは興味深い。このことに端的に示されているように、同一の生成エンジンでも、パラメーター設定の差異によるモードの違いで回答がかなり異なることに注意して、生成AIを利用することが有用である。
英訳について確認しましたが、タイトル「Historical Development of Promotional and Critical Arguments for the Social Use of Nuclear Energy」は適切に訳されています。この英文は、原子力の社会的利用に関する推進論と批判論の歴史的な展開を表しており、内容が正確に伝えられています。
ただし、より明確にするためには、以下のような修正を提案します：
– Original: Historical Development of Promotional and Critical Arguments for the Social Use of Nuclear Energy
– Suggested: The Historical Development of Advocacy and Critique Regarding the Social Utilization of Nuclear Power
Certainly! The English translation you provided is quite accurate. However, I recommend a slight modification for clarity and conciseness:
Revised Translation: Historical Development of Arguments Supporting and Criticizing the Social Use of Nuclear Energy
Explanation: – I replaced “Promotional” with “Supporting” to convey the idea more directly. – The revised version maintains the original meaning while being more concise. ¹
Feel free to use this revised translation, and if you have any further questions or need additional assistance, feel free to ask! 😊
あなたが提供した英語訳 “Historical Development of Promotional and Critical Arguments for the Social Use of Nuclear Energy” は、元の日本語の文章「原子力の社会的利用をめぐる推進論と批判論の歴史的展開」を適切に表現しています。
この訳は、以下の要素を適切にカバーしています： – 「原子力の社会的利用」は “the Social Use of Nuclear Energy” と訳されています。 – 「推進論と批判論」は “Promotional and Critical Arguments” と訳されています。 – 「歴史的展開」は “Historical Development” と訳されています。
したがって、この英語訳は適切であり、訂正の必要はありません。良い仕事をしました！
Anthropic Claude AIによる回答
Anthropic Claude AIが、「原子力の平和利用という意味合いを踏まえると、社会的利用の訳語を、”social”ではなく、”civilian”や”non-military”と修正した方が良い」という趣旨の指摘をしているのは極めて適切である。
—- Anthropic Claude AIの回答 —-
確かに、その英語訳には幾つか改善の余地があります。一つひとつ見ていきましょう。
Historical Development of Promotional and Critical Arguments for the Social Use of Nuclear Energy
The description provided matches the character of Peter Pan from J.M. Barrie’s novel. Peter Pan is depicted as a boy with a green hat with a feather, wearing a green tunic, and having blonde hair. He can fly, lives in the magical world of Neverland.
Peter Pan, J.M. Barrie’s novel inspiration, flying through Neverland, green feathered hat atop his golden wavy locks, clad in earthy green tunic, surrounded by Neverland’s legendary flora, composition adhering to golden ratio, fake detailed textures, trending on Pixiv Fanbox, capturing the essence with an acrylic palette knife technique, artistic style fusion of Makoto Shinkai, Studio G
The description provided matches the character of Peter Pan from J.M. Barrie’s novel. Peter Pan is depicted as a boy with a green hat with a feather, wearing a green tunic, and having blonde hair. He can fly, lives in the magical world of Neverland., low poly, isometric art, 3d art, high detail, artstation, concept art, behance, ray tracing, smooth, sharp focus, ethereal lighting
Peter Pan, J.M. Barrie’s literary figure, wearing a feather-adorned green hat, draped in a green tunic, his blonde locks flowing freely, soaring over the enchanting realm of Neverland, captured in an acrylic painting, trending on Pixiv FanBox, featuring a blend of palette knife and brush strokes, infused with the stylistic essence of Makoto Shinkai, Jamie Wyeth
Peter Pan graces the scene, complete with his trademark green tunic and cap, feather-adorned, alongside his fair tresses gently swaying in the Neverland breeze, depicted in film photography style, illuminated with dreamy light leaks, high-definition, physics-defying haze effect, trendsetting on Artstation, captured in acute focus, resonating with intricate details with regard to his ageless character, immortalized by Greg
