Oil & Water? Diffusion of AI Within and Across Scientific Fields
2
Sign in to get full access
Overview
- Examines the diffusion of AI within and across scientific fields
- Analyzes how AI is being adopted and used in different disciplines
- Investigates the potential tensions and synergies between AI and other scientific domains
Plain English Explanation
This paper looks at how the use of artificial intelligence (AI) is spreading both within individual scientific fields and across different fields. The researchers wanted to understand how AI is being adopted and applied in various areas of science, and whether there are any conflicts or opportunities that arise from integrating AI with other scientific approaches.
The key idea is that while AI can be a powerful tool for advancing scientific research, it may not always fit seamlessly with the existing methods and cultures of different disciplines. Just like oil and water, AI and certain scientific fields may not always mix well. The paper explores these dynamics, providing insights into the challenges and potential benefits of diffusing AI across the scientific landscape.
Technical Explanation
The researchers analyzed a large dataset of scientific publications to examine the patterns of AI use within and across fields. They looked at factors like the prevalence of AI-related terms, the co-occurrence of AI with other topics, and the citations between AI-focused and non-AI-focused papers.
The findings suggest that AI is being more readily adopted in some fields, like computer science and mathematics, compared to others, like the social sciences and humanities. There also appear to be differences in how AI is integrated, with some disciplines incorporating it as a core tool, while others treat it more as a complementary approach.
The paper further explores the potential tensions that can arise when AI is introduced into established scientific domains. For example, the different cultural norms and epistemological assumptions of AI and other fields may create challenges in seamlessly integrating the technologies.
Critical Analysis
The paper provides a valuable perspective on the diffusion of AI within and across scientific fields. However, it is important to note that the analysis is based on publication data, which may not fully capture the nuances of how AI is being used in practice in various disciplines.
Additionally, the paper does not delve deeply into the specific factors that may be driving the differential adoption of AI, such as the availability of data, the computational resources required, or the alignment of AI with the core research questions and methodologies of different fields.
Further research could explore these underlying drivers in more detail, as well as investigate the long-term implications of the observed patterns. It would also be interesting to examine the potential societal impacts of the uneven diffusion of AI across scientific domains.
Conclusion
This paper provides important insights into the complex dynamics of how AI is being adopted and integrated within and across scientific fields. The findings suggest that the diffusion of AI is not a straightforward process, and that there may be inherent tensions and misalignments that need to be carefully navigated.
Understanding these patterns can help researchers, policymakers, and the broader scientific community better anticipate and manage the challenges and opportunities that arise as AI becomes increasingly pervasive in scientific research. By addressing the nuances of AI's integration with different disciplines, we can work towards more effective and responsible use of these powerful technologies in advancing scientific knowledge and discovery.
This summary was produced with help from an AI and may contain inaccuracies - check out the links to read the original source documents!
Related Papers
2
Oil & Water? Diffusion of AI Within and Across Scientific Fields
Eamon Duede, William Dolan, Andr'e Bauer, Ian Foster, Karim Lakhani
This study empirically investigates claims of the increasing ubiquity of artificial intelligence (AI) within roughly 80 million research publications across 20 diverse scientific fields, by examining the change in scholarly engagement with AI from 1985 through 2022. We observe exponential growth, with AI-engaged publications increasing approximately thirteenfold (13x) across all fields, suggesting a dramatic shift from niche to mainstream. Moreover, we provide the first empirical examination of the distribution of AI-engaged publications across publication venues within individual fields, with results that reveal a broadening of AI engagement within disciplines. While this broadening engagement suggests a move toward greater disciplinary integration in every field, increased ubiquity is associated with a semantic tension between AI-engaged research and more traditional disciplinary research. Through an analysis of tens of millions of document embeddings, we observe a complex interplay between AI-engaged and non-AI-engaged research within and across fields, suggesting that increasing ubiquity is something of an oil-and-water phenomenon -- AI-engaged work is spreading out over fields, but not mixing well with non-AI-engaged work.
Read more5/28/2024
✨
0
Quantifying the Benefit of Artificial Intelligence for Scientific Research
Jian Gao, Dashun Wang
The ongoing artificial intelligence (AI) revolution has the potential to change almost every line of work. As AI capabilities continue to improve in accuracy, robustness, and reach, AI may outperform and even replace human experts across many valuable tasks. Despite enormous effort devoted to understanding the impact of AI on labor and the economy and AI's recent successes in accelerating scientific discovery and progress, we lack a systematic understanding of how AI advances may benefit scientific research across disciplines and fields. Here, drawing from the literature on the future of work and the science of science, we develop a measurement framework to estimate both the direct use of AI and the potential benefit of AI in scientific research, applying natural language processing techniques to 74.6 million publications and 7.1 million patents. We find that the use of AI in research is widespread throughout the sciences, growing especially rapidly since 2015, and papers that use AI exhibit a citation premium, more likely to be highly cited both within and outside their disciplines. Moreover, our analysis reveals considerable potential for AI to benefit numerous scientific fields, yet a notable disconnect exists between AI education and its research applications, highlighting a mismatch between the supply of AI expertise and its demand in research. Lastly, we examine demographic disparities in AI's benefits across scientific disciplines and find that disciplines with a higher proportion of women or Black scientists tend to be associated with less benefit, suggesting that AI's growing impact on research may further exacerbate existing inequalities in science. As the connection between AI and scientific research deepens, our findings may become increasingly important, with implications for the equity and sustainability of the research enterprise.
Read more6/4/2024
🌿
0
We are Who We Cite: Bridges of Influence Between Natural Language Processing and Other Academic Fields
Jan Philip Wahle, Terry Ruas, Mohamed Abdalla, Bela Gipp, Saif M. Mohammad
Natural Language Processing (NLP) is poised to substantially influence the world. However, significant progress comes hand-in-hand with substantial risks. Addressing them requires broad engagement with various fields of study. Yet, little empirical work examines the state of such engagement (past or current). In this paper, we quantify the degree of influence between 23 fields of study and NLP (on each other). We analyzed ~77k NLP papers, ~3.1m citations from NLP papers to other papers, and ~1.8m citations from other papers to NLP papers. We show that, unlike most fields, the cross-field engagement of NLP, measured by our proposed Citation Field Diversity Index (CFDI), has declined from 0.58 in 1980 to 0.31 in 2022 (an all-time low). In addition, we find that NLP has grown more insular -- citing increasingly more NLP papers and having fewer papers that act as bridges between fields. NLP citations are dominated by computer science; Less than 8% of NLP citations are to linguistics, and less than 3% are to math and psychology. These findings underscore NLP's urgent need to reflect on its engagement with various fields.
Read more7/17/2024
💬
0
Social Evolution of Published Text and The Emergence of Artificial Intelligence Through Large Language Models and The Problem of Toxicity and Bias
Arifa Khan, P. Saravanan, S. K Venkatesan
We provide a birds eye view of the rapid developments in AI and Deep Learning that has led to the path-breaking emergence of AI in Large Language Models. The aim of this study is to place all these developments in a pragmatic broader historical social perspective without any exaggerations while at the same time without any pessimism that created the AI winter in the 1970s to 1990s. We also at the same time point out toxicity, bias, memorization, sycophancy, logical inconsistencies, hallucinations that exist just as a warning to the overly optimistic. We note here that just as this emergence of AI seems to occur at a threshold point in the number of neural connections or weights, it has also been observed that human brain and especially the cortex region is nothing special or extraordinary but simply a case of scaled-up version of the primate brain and that even the human intelligence seems like an emergent phenomena of scale.
Read more5/20/2024