ArticleArXiv2025
An Intelligent Infrastructure as a Foundation for Modern Science.
Article in ArXiv, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
Abstract
Infrastructure shapes societies and scientific discovery. Traditional scientific infrastructure, often static and fragmented, leads to issues like data silos, lack of interoperability and reproducibility, and unsustainable short-lived solutions. Our current technical inability and social reticence to connect and coordinate scientific research and engineering leads to inefficiencies and impedes progress. With AI technologies changing how we interact with the world around us, there is an opportunity to transform scientific processes. Neuroscience's exponential growth of multimodal and multiscale data, and urgent clinical relevance demand an infrastructure itself learns, coordinates, and improves. Using neuroscience as a stress test, this perspective argues for a paradigm shift: infrastructure must evolve into a dynamic, AI-aligned ecosystem to accelerate science. Building on several existing principles for data, collective benefit, and digital repositories, I recommend operational guidelines for implementing them to create this dynamic ecosystem, aiming to foster a decentralized, self-learning, and self-correcting system where humans and AI can collaborate seamlessly. Addressing the chronic underfunding of scientific infrastructure, acknowledging diverse contributions beyond publications, and coordinating global efforts are critical steps for this transformation. By prioritizing an intelligent infrastructure as a central scientific instrument for knowledge generation, we can overcome current limitations, accelerate discovery, ensure reproducibility and ethical practices, and ultimately translate neuroscientific understanding into tangible societal benefits, setting a blueprint for other scientific domains.
Identifiers
40832056PMC12364050What 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.