Close Menu

    Subscribe to Updates

    Get the latest creative news from FooBar about art, design and business.

    What's Hot

    Officials ‘missed 99% of data’ on Covid vaccines before making recommendation, memos reveal | US news

    Kent meningitis outbreak: key questions answered | Meningitis

    A 100-year-old theory might explain what’s wrong with quantum mechanics

    Facebook X (Twitter) Instagram
    Facebook X (Twitter) YouTube LinkedIn
    Naija Global News |
    Monday, March 16
    • Business
    • Health
    • Politics
    • Science
    • Sports
    • Education
    • Social Issues
    • Technology
    • More
      • Crime & Justice
      • Environment
      • Entertainment
    Naija Global News |
    You are at:Home»Science»Artificial intelligence tools expand scientists’ impact but contract science’s focus
    Science

    Artificial intelligence tools expand scientists’ impact but contract science’s focus

    onlyplanz_80y6mtBy onlyplanz_80y6mtJanuary 15, 2026008 Mins Read
    Share Facebook Twitter Pinterest LinkedIn Tumblr Email
    Artificial intelligence tools expand scientists’ impact but contract science’s focus
    Fig. 1: Increasing prevalence of AI adoption in science.
    Share
    Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Pinterest Email

  • Wang, H. et al. Scientific discovery in the age of artificial intelligence. Nature 620, 47–60 (2023).

    Article 
    ADS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 

  • Hopfield, J. J. Neural networks and physical systems with emergent collective computational abilities. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 79, 2554–2558 (1982).

    Article 
    ADS 
    MathSciNet 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 

  • Hopfield, J. J. Neurons with graded response have collective computational properties like those of two-state neurons. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 81, 3088–3092 (1984).

    Article 
    ADS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 

  • LeCun, Y., Bengio, Y. & Hinton, G. Deep learning. Nature 521, 436–444 (2015).

    Article 
    ADS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 

  • Krizhevsky, A., Sutskever, I. & Hinton, G. E. Imagenet classification with deep convolutional neural networks. Commun. ACM, 60, 84–90 (2012).

  • Hinton, G. E. & Salakhutdinov, R. R. Reducing the dimensionality of data with neural networks. Science 313, 504–507 (2006).

    Article 
    ADS 
    MathSciNet 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 

  • Hinton, G. E. Training products of experts by minimizing contrastive divergence. Neural Comput. 14, 1771–1800 (2002).

    Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuhlman, B. et al. Design of a novel globular protein fold with atomic-level accuracy. Science 302, 1364–1368 (2003).

    Article 
    ADS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 

  • Jumper, J. et al. Highly accurate protein structure prediction with alphafold. Nature 596, 583–589 (2021).

    Article 
    ADS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 

  • Gao, J. & Wang, D. Quantifying the use and potential benefits of artificial intelligence in scientific research. Nat. Human Behav. 8, 2281–2292 (2024).

  • Evans, J. A. Electronic publication and the narrowing of science and scholarship. Science 321, 395–399 (2008).

    Article 
    ADS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 

  • Adıgüzel, T., Kaya, M. H. & Cansu, F. K. Revolutionizing education with AI: exploring the transformative potential of ChatGPT. Contemp. Educat. Technol. 15, ep429 (2023).

  • Akgun, S. & Greenhow, C. Artificial intelligence in education: addressing ethical challenges in K-12 settings. AI Ethics 2, 431–440 (2022).

    Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 

  • Meskó, B. & Topol, E. J. The imperative for regulatory oversight of large language models (or generative AI) in healthcare. npj Digital Med. 6, 120 (2023).

    Article 

    Google Scholar 

  • Loh, H. W. et al. Application of explainable artificial intelligence for healthcare: a systematic review of the last decade (2011–2022). Comput. Methods Prog. Biomed. 226, 107161 (2022).

  • Ahmed, I., Jeon, G. & Piccialli, F. From artificial intelligence to explainable artificial intelligence in industry 4.0: a survey on what, how, and where. IEEE Trans. Indust. Inform. 18, 5031–5042 (2022).

    Article 

    Google Scholar 

  • Varadi, M. et al. Alphafold protein structure database: massively expanding the structural coverage of protein-sequence space with high-accuracy models. Nucl. Acids Res. 50, D439–D444 (2022).

    Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 

  • Degrave, J. et al. Magnetic control of tokamak plasmas through deep reinforcement learning. Nature 602, 414–419 (2022).

    Article 
    ADS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 

  • Fawzi, A. et al. Discovering faster matrix multiplication algorithms with reinforcement learning. Nature 610, 47–53 (2022).

    Article 
    ADS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 

  • Boiko, D. A., MacKnight, R., Kline, B. & Gomes, G. Autonomous chemical research with large language models. Nature 624, 570–578 (2023).

    Article 
    ADS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 

  • Stokel-Walker, C. & Van Noorden, R. What ChatGPT and generative AI mean for science. Nature 614, 214–216 (2023).

    Article 
    ADS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 

  • Gilson, A. et al. How does ChatGPT perform on the United States medical licensing examination? The implications of large language models for medical education and knowledge assessment. JMIR Med. Educat. 9, e45312 (2023).

    Article 

    Google Scholar 

  • Salimi, A. & Saheb, H. Large language models in ophthalmology scientific writing: ethical considerations blurred lines or not at all? Am. J. Ophthalmol. 254, 177–181 (2023).

    Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 

  • Liang, W. et al. Mapping the increasing use of LLMs in scientific papers. In Proc. 1st Conference on Language Modeling (COLM, USA, 2024).

  • Hwang, T. et al. Can ChatGPT assist authors with abstract writing in medical journals? Evaluating the quality of scientific abstracts generated by ChatGPT and original abstracts. PLoS ONE 19, e0297701 (2024).

    Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 

  • Kobak, D., González-Márquez, R., Horvát, E.-Á. & Lause, J. Delving into LLM-assisted writing in biomedical publications through excess vocabulary. Sci. Adv. 11, eadt3813 (2025).

    Article 
    ADS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 

  • Wojtowicz, Z. & DeDeo, S. Undermining Mental Proof: How AI Can Make Cooperation Harder by Making Thinking Easier Vol. 39, 1592–1600 (2025).

  • Frank, M. R., Wang, D., Cebrian, M. & Rahwan, I. The evolution of citation graphs in artificial intelligence research. Nat. Mach. Intell. 1, 79–85 (2019).

    Article 

    Google Scholar 

  • OpenAlex (OpenAlex, 2025); https://openalex.org/.

  • Clarivate (Web of Science, 2025); https://www.webofscience.com.

  • Mongeon, P. & Paul-Hus, A. The journal coverage of web of science and scopus: a comparative analysis. Scientometrics 106, 213–228 (2016).

    Article 

    Google Scholar 

  • Devlin, J. et al. BERT: pre-training of deep bidirectional transformers for language understanding. In Proc. 57th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics 4171–4186 (ACL, Italy, 2019).

  • Wolf, T. et al. Transformers: State-of-the-art natural language processing. In Proc. 58th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics 38–45 (ACL, 2020).

  • Beltagy, I., Lo, K. & Cohan, A. SciBERT: a pretrained language model for scientific text. In Proc. 57th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics 3613–3618 (ACL, Italy, 2019).

  • Cohan, A., Feldman, S., Beltagy, I., Downey, D. & Weld, D. S. SPECTER: document-level representation learning using citation-informed transformers. In Proc. 58th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics 2270–2282 (ACL, 2020).

  • Singh, A., D’Arcy, M., Cohan, A., Downey, D. & Feldman, S. SciRepEval: a multi-format benchmark for scientific document representations. In Proc. 61st Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics 5548–5566 (ACL, Canada, 2023).

  • Landis, J. R. & Koch, G. G. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 33, 159–174 (1977).

  • Fleiss, J. L. Measuring nominal scale agreement among many raters. Psychol. Bull. 76, 378 (1971).

    Article 

    Google Scholar 

  • Chu, J. S. & Evans, J. A. Slowed canonical progress in large fields of science. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 118, e2021636118 (2021).

    Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 

  • Journal Citation Reports (Clarivate, 2021); https://jcr.clarivate.com/jcr/home.

  • Ioannidis, J. P., Boyack, K. W. & Klavans, R. Estimates of the continuously publishing core in the scientific workforce. PloS ONE 9, e101698 (2014).

    Article 
    ADS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 

  • Kendall, D. G. Birth-and-death processes, and the theory of carcinogenesis. Biometrika 47, 13–21 (1960).

    Article 
    MathSciNet 

    Google Scholar 

  • Fortunato, S. et al. Science of science. Science 359, eaao0185 (2018).

    Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 

  • Milojević, S. Quantifying the cognitive extent of science. J. Informetrics 9, 962–973 (2015).

    Article 

    Google Scholar 

  • McMahan, P. & Evans, J. Ambiguity and engagement. Am. J. Sociol. 124, 860–912 (2018).

    Article 

    Google Scholar 

  • Merton, R. K. The matthew effect in science: the reward and communication systems of science are considered. Science 159, 56–63 (1968).

    Article 
    ADS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 

  • Borger, J. G. et al. Artificial intelligence takes center stage: exploring the capabilities and implications of chatgpt and other AI-assisted technologies in scientific research and education. Immunol. Cell Biol. 101, 923–935 (2023).

    Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 

  • Lawrence, N. D. & Montgomery, J. Accelerating AI for science: open data science for science. Royal Soc. Open Sci. 11, 231130 (2024).

    Article 
    ADS 

    Google Scholar 

  • King, R. D. et al. The automation of science. Science 324, 85–89 (2009).

    Article 
    ADS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 

  • Burger, B. et al. A mobile robotic chemist. Nature 583, 237–241 (2020).

    Article 
    ADS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 

  • Krauss, A. Debunking Revolutionary Paradigm Shifts: Evidence of Cumulative Scientific Progress Across Science Vol. 480, 20240141 (The Royal Society, 2024).

  • Microsoft Academic Graph (Microsoft, 2015); https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/research/project/microsoft-academic-graph.

  • Open Academic Graph (Aminer, 2020); https://old.aminer.cn/oag-2-1.

  • Porter, A. & Rafols, I. Is science becoming more interdisciplinary? Measuring and mapping six research fields over time. Scientometrics 81, 719–745 (2009).

    Article 

    Google Scholar 

  • Rumelhart, D. E., Hinton, G. E. & Williams, R. J. Learning representations by back-propagating errors. Nature 323, 533–536 (1986).

    Article 
    ADS 

    Google Scholar 

  • LeCun, Y. et al. Backpropagation applied to handwritten zip code recognition. Neural Comput. 1, 541–551 (1989).

    Article 

    Google Scholar 

  • He, K., Zhang, X., Ren, S. & Sun, J. Deep residual Learning for image recognition. In CVPR’16: Proc. 2016 IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition 770–778 (2016).

  • Face, H. Bert for Sequence Classification (Hugging Face, 2025); https://huggingface.co/docs/transformers/model_doc/bert#transformers.BertForSequenceClassification.

  • Sekara, V. et al. The chaperone effect in scientific publishing. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 115, 12603–12607 (2018).

    Article 
    ADS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen, T. & Guestrin, C. XGBoost: a scalable tree boosting system. In KDD’16: Proc. 22nd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining 785–794 (2016).

  • Hill, R. et al. The pivot penalty in research. Nature 642, 999–1006 (2025).

  • Milojević, S., Radicchi, F. & Walsh, J. P. Changing demographics of scientific careers: the rise of the temporary workforce. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 115, 12616–12623 (2018).

    Article 
    ADS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 

  • Xu, F., Wu, L. & Evans, J. Flat teams drive scientific innovation. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 119, e2200927119 (2022).

    Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 

  • Lin, Y., Frey, C. B. & Wu, L. Remote collaboration fuses fewer breakthrough ideas. Nature 623, 987–991 (2023).

    Article 
    ADS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 

  • Kingman, J. F. C. Poisson Processes Vol. 3 (Clarendon, 1992).

  • Meisling, T. Discrete-time queuing theory. Operat. Res. 6, 96–105 (1958).

    Article 
    MathSciNet 

    Google Scholar 

  • Artificial contract expand Focus impact Intelligence sciences Scientists Tools
    Share. Facebook Twitter Pinterest LinkedIn Tumblr Email
    Previous ArticleAmericans Overwhelmingly Support Science, but Some Think the U.S. Is Lagging Behind: Pew
    Next Article Maps: 3.1-Magnitude Earthquake Shakes the San Francisco Bay Area
    onlyplanz_80y6mt
    • Website

    Related Posts

    Officials ‘missed 99% of data’ on Covid vaccines before making recommendation, memos reveal | US news

    March 16, 2026

    The real story behind China’s technology triumph

    March 16, 2026

    Oil shock, nuclear doubts, climate‑change-driven hail, and new insights on the aging-gut-brain connection

    March 16, 2026
    Add A Comment
    Leave A Reply Cancel Reply

    Top Posts

    Watch Lady Gaga’s Perform ‘Vanish Into You’ on ‘Colbert’

    September 9, 20251 Views

    Advertisers flock to Fox seeking an ‘audience of one’ — Donald Trump

    July 13, 20251 Views

    A Setback for Maine’s Free Community College Program

    June 19, 20251 Views
    Stay In Touch
    • Facebook
    • YouTube
    • TikTok
    • WhatsApp
    • Twitter
    • Instagram
    Latest Reviews

    At Chile’s Vera Rubin Observatory, Earth’s Largest Camera Surveys the Sky

    By onlyplanz_80y6mtJune 19, 2025

    SpaceX Starship Explodes Before Test Fire

    By onlyplanz_80y6mtJune 19, 2025

    How the L.A. Port got hit by Trump’s Tariffs

    By onlyplanz_80y6mtJune 19, 2025

    Subscribe to Updates

    Get the latest tech news from FooBar about tech, design and biz.

    Most Popular

    Watch Lady Gaga’s Perform ‘Vanish Into You’ on ‘Colbert’

    September 9, 20251 Views

    Advertisers flock to Fox seeking an ‘audience of one’ — Donald Trump

    July 13, 20251 Views

    A Setback for Maine’s Free Community College Program

    June 19, 20251 Views
    Our Picks

    Officials ‘missed 99% of data’ on Covid vaccines before making recommendation, memos reveal | US news

    Kent meningitis outbreak: key questions answered | Meningitis

    A 100-year-old theory might explain what’s wrong with quantum mechanics

    Recent Posts
    • Officials ‘missed 99% of data’ on Covid vaccines before making recommendation, memos reveal | US news
    • Kent meningitis outbreak: key questions answered | Meningitis
    • A 100-year-old theory might explain what’s wrong with quantum mechanics
    • The real story behind China’s technology triumph
    • Southern Oregon Gets Help, Portland State Plans to Cut
    © 2026 naijaglobalnews. Designed by Pro.
    • About Us
    • Disclaimer
    • Get In Touch
    • Privacy Policy
    • Terms and Conditions

    Type above and press Enter to search. Press Esc to cancel.