arXiv subjects

Cornelia Lawson

Publications and source records attributed to Cornelia Lawson.

4 recordsLinked to original sources

arXiv2026

Does Artificial Intelligence Advance Science?

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.

cs.CY↗

arXiv2025

Generative AI in Science: Applications, Challenges, and Emerging Questions

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.

cs.CY↗

arXiv2024

Rise of Generative Artificial Intelligence in Science

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.

cs.CY↗

arXiv2019

The Rise of Multiple Institutional Affiliations in Academia

This study provides the first systematic, international, large-scale evidence on the extent and nature of multiple institutional affiliations on journal publications. Studying more than 15 million authors and 22 million articles from 40 countries we document that: In 2019, almost one in three articles was (co-)authored by authors with multiple affiliations and the share of authors with multiple affiliations increased from around 10% to 16% since 1996. The growth of multiple affiliations is prevalent in all fields and it is stronger in high impact journals. About 60% of multiple affiliations are between institutions from within the academic sector. International co-affiliations, which account for about a quarter of multiple affiliations, most often involve institutions from the United States, China, Germany and the United Kingdom, suggesting a core-periphery network. Network analysis also reveals a number communities of countries that are more likely to share affiliations. We discuss potential causes and show that the timing of the rise in multiple affiliations can be linked to the introduction of more competitive funding structures such as 'excellence initiatives' in a number of countries. We discuss implications for science and science policy.

econ.GN↗