Philip Shapira

Liangping Ding, Cornelia Lawson, Philip Shapira

This paper examines whether and how artificial intelligence (AI) advances scientific creativity. Drawing on scientific publications, the primary output of researchers, we analyze over one million publications from OpenAlex to investigate the relationship between AI adoption and multiple dimensions of scientific creativity, including novelty (recombinant novelty and object novelty) and impact (3-year short-run citation impact and 10-year long-run citation impact). We find that AI publications are significantly more likely to achieve top-decile creativity relative to non-AI publications, with 5.5 to 10.2 percentage point higher likelihood to rank in the top creativity decile. Critically, we uncover substantial heterogeneity across AI research modes. Tool-oriented AI research, which applies existing AI models to domain tasks, is associated with the largest gains in recombinant-based creativity, while Adaptation-oriented AI research, modifying AI models for domain-specific problems, is associated with relatively higher object-based creativity. These findings reveal that AI does not advance science through a single mechanism but through structurally distinct creative pathways that depend on how AI is incorporated into the research process. Our results contribute to ongoing debates about AI's role in science and carry direct implications for research evaluation and science policy, highlighting the need for assessment frameworks that can distinguish between recombinant and conceptual forms of creativity and that recognize how different modes of AI adoption produce fundamentally different types of scientific contribution.

Liangping Ding, Cornelia Lawson, Philip Shapira

Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI, generative AI) has rapidly become available as a tool in scientific research. To explore the use of generative AI in science, we conduct an empirical analysis using OpenAlex. Analyzing GenAI publications and other AI publications from 2017 to 2023, we profile growth patterns, the diffusion of GenAI publications across fields of study, and the geographical spread of scientific research on generative AI. We also investigate team size and international collaborations to explore whether GenAI, as an emerging scientific research area, shows different collaboration patterns compared to other AI technologies. The results indicate that generative AI has experienced rapid growth and increasing presence in scientific publications. The use of GenAI now extends beyond computer science to other scientific research domains. Over the study period, U.S. researchers contributed nearly two-fifths of global GenAI publications. The U.S. is followed by China, with several small and medium-sized advanced economies demonstrating relatively high levels of GenAI deployment in their research publications. Although scientific research overall is becoming increasingly specialized and collaborative, our results suggest that GenAI research groups tend to have slightly smaller team sizes than found in other AI fields. Furthermore, notwithstanding recent geopolitical tensions, GenAI research continues to exhibit levels of international collaboration comparable to other AI technologies.

Ryan Harries, Cornelia Lawson, Philip Shapira

This paper examines the impact of Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) on scientific practices, conducting a qualitative review of selected literature to explore its applications, benefits, and challenges. The review draws on the OpenAlex publication database, using a Boolean search approach to identify scientific literature related to GenAI (including large language models and ChatGPT). Thirty-nine highly cited papers and commentaries are reviewed and qualitatively coded. Results are categorized by GenAI applications in science, scientific writing, medical practice, and education and training. The analysis finds that while there is a rapid adoption of GenAI in science and science practice, its long-term implications remain unclear, with ongoing uncertainties about its use and governance. The study provides early insights into GenAI's growing role in science and identifies questions for future research in this evolving field.

John P. Nelson, Olajide Olugbade, Philip Shapira et al.

Artificial intelligence (AI) raises expectations of substantial increases in rates of technological and scientific progress, but such anticipations are often not connected to detailed ground-level studies of AI use in innovation processes. Accordingly, it remains unclear how and to what extent AI can accelerate innovation. To help to fill this gap, we report results from 32 interviews with U.S.-based academic manufacturing and materials sciences researchers experienced with AI and machine learning (ML) techniques. Interviewees primarily used AI for modeling of materials and manufacturing processes, facilitating cheaper and more rapid search of design spaces for materials and manufacturing processes alike. They report benefits including cost, time, and computation savings in technology development. However, interviewees also report that AI/ML tools are unreliable outside design spaces for which dense data are already available; that they require skilled and judicious application in tandem with older research techniques; and that AI/ML tools may detrimentally circumvent opportunities for disruptive theoretical advancement. Based on these results, we suggest there is reason for optimism about acceleration in sustaining innovations through the use of to AI/ML; but that support for conventional empirical, computational, and theoretical research is required to maintain the likelihood of further major advances in manufacturing and materials science.

Sergio Pelaez, Gaurav Verma, Barbara Ribeiro et al.

Labeling data is essential for training text classifiers but is often difficult to accomplish accurately, especially for complex and abstract concepts. Seeking an improved method, this paper employs a novel approach using a generative language model (GPT-4) to produce labels and rationales for large-scale text analysis. We apply this approach to the task of discovering public value expressions in US AI patents. We collect a database comprising 154,934 patent documents using an advanced Boolean query submitted to InnovationQ+. The results are merged with full patent text from the USPTO, resulting in 5.4 million sentences. We design a framework for identifying and labeling public value expressions in these AI patent sentences. A prompt for GPT-4 is developed which includes definitions, guidelines, examples, and rationales for text classification. We evaluate the quality of the labels and rationales produced by GPT-4 using BLEU scores and topic modeling and find that they are accurate, diverse, and faithful. These rationales also serve as a chain-of-thought for the model, a transparent mechanism for human verification, and support for human annotators to overcome cognitive limitations. We conclude that GPT-4 achieved a high-level of recognition of public value theory from our framework, which it also uses to discover unseen public value expressions. We use the labels produced by GPT-4 to train BERT-based classifiers and predict sentences on the entire database, achieving high F1 scores for the 3-class (0.85) and 2-class classification (0.91) tasks. We discuss the implications of our approach for conducting large-scale text analyses with complex and abstract concepts and suggest that, with careful framework design and interactive human oversight, generative language models can offer significant advantages in quality and in reduced time and costs for producing labels and rationales.