AI boosts researchers' productivity but narrows the field of science

A study of 41 million scientific papers reveals a paradox: researchers who use AI publish much more, but science as a whole explores fewer topics.

A study conducted by researcher James Evans of the University of Chicago, looking at about 41 million scientific papers, shows that researchers who integrate AI into their work publish on average three times as many papers, receive nearly five times as many citations, and move into project leadership positions more than a year earlier than their colleagues.

But these individual gains are accompanied by a worrying collective effect: the widespread adoption of AI would reduce the diversity of research topics explored and reduce interactions between researchers. AI tools would indeed promote work carried out in fields already rich in data, concentrating efforts on established fields at the expense of riskier frontiers where real scientific breakthroughs are often born.