ArticleNature human behaviour2024
Quantifying the use and potential benefits of artificial intelligence in scientific research.
Article in Nature human behaviour, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
13 citing papers in PubMed.
- The rise of large language models and the direction and impact of US federal research funding.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026Article
- AI-Driven Data Extraction and AGREE-Based Greenness Evaluation of Analytical Methods for Natural Products: Insights from Selected Studies.Analytical chemistry · 2026Article
- Reported trust varies with graded value alignment in AI-attributed economic-environmental choices.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Academic journals' AI policies fail to curb the surge in AI-assisted academic writing.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026Article
- AI agents are 'aeroplanes for the mind': five ways to ensure that scientists are responsible pilots.Nature · 2026Article
- SciSciGPT: advancing human-AI collaboration in the science of science.Nature computational science · 2026Article
- Recalibrating academic expertise in the age of generative AI.Patterns (New York, N.Y.) · 2026Review
- The European tracking network through time: united efforts to advance aquatic conservation in Europe.Animal biotelemetry · 2026Review
- Unequal Scientific Recognition in the Age of LLMs.Findings of ACL. EMNLP. Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing · 2025Article
- From Trust in Automation to Trust in AI in Healthcare: A 30-Year Longitudinal Review and an Interdisciplinary Framework.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Artificial Intelligence Is Stereotypically Linked More with Socially Dominant Groups in Natural Language.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2025Article
- The Geometry of Language: Understanding LLMs in Bioethics.Journal of bioethical inquiry · 2025Article
- Cross-tool evaluation of artificial intelligence-drafted informed consent documents: A 3-level study.Perspectives in clinical researchArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The rapid advancement of artificial intelligence (AI) is poised to reshape almost every line of work. Despite enormous efforts devoted to understanding AI's economic impacts, we lack a systematic understanding of the benefits to scientific research associated with the use of AI. Here we develop a measurement framework to estimate the direct use of AI and associated benefits in science. We find that the use and benefits of AI appear widespread throughout the sciences, growing especially rapidly since 2015. However, there is a substantial gap between AI education and its application in research, highlighting a misalignment between AI expertise supply and demand. Our analysis also reveals demographic disparities, with disciplines with higher proportions of women or Black scientists reaping fewer benefits from AI, potentially exacerbating existing inequalities in science. These findings have implications for the equity and sustainability of the research enterprise, especially as the integration of AI with science continues to deepen.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39394445What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.