SearcharxivSearch

arXiv subjects

Naixuan Zhao

Publications and source records attributed to Naixuan Zhao.

3 recordsLinked to original sources

Large language models reshape the language of science

Scientific language is a central infrastructure of knowledge production, but it remains unclear whether large language models (LLMs) are altering not only how scientists write, but also how scientific knowledge is communicated and accessed. Here we analyze 21.36 million scientific abstracts published between 2020 and 2024, together with historical records from major journals, to trace recent changes in the language of science. We identify a marked turning point in 2024, when scientific writing shows a sharp increase in lexical complexity alongside a decline in syntactic complexity. This shift is pervasive across disciplines and journal tiers, and is more pronounced in texts by scholars working in non-native English contexts, especially those from language backgrounds that differ more typologically from English. Controlled polishing experiments confirm that LLMs reproduce this pattern by favoring more lexically dense and syntactically compressed expression. We further show why this linguistic shift matters: it may widen the distance between scientific discourse and public-facing language, while also helping scholars in non-native English contexts navigate English-language publishing requirements. These findings suggest that LLMs may broaden participation in scientific authorship while narrowing the accessibility of scientific communication, making them a new force in the linguistic infrastructure of science.

cs.CL

LingLanMiDian: Systematic Evaluation of LLMs on TCM Knowledge and Clinical Reasoning

Large language models (LLMs) are advancing rapidly in medical NLP, yet Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM) with its distinctive ontology, terminology, and reasoning patterns requires domain-faithful evaluation. Existing TCM benchmarks are fragmented in coverage and scale and rely on non-unified or generation-heavy scoring that hinders fair comparison. We present the LingLanMiDian (LingLan) benchmark, a large-scale, expert-curated, multi-task suite that unifies evaluation across knowledge recall, multi-hop reasoning, information extraction, and real-world clinical decision-making. LingLan introduces a consistent metric design, a synonym-tolerant protocol for clinical labels, a per-dataset 400-item Hard subset, and a reframing of diagnosis and treatment recommendation into single-choice decision recognition. We conduct comprehensive, zero-shot evaluations on 14 leading open-source and proprietary LLMs, providing a unified perspective on their strengths and limitations in TCM commonsense knowledge understanding, reasoning, and clinical decision support; critically, the evaluation on Hard subset reveals a substantial gap between current models and human experts in TCM-specialized reasoning. By bridging fundamental knowledge and applied reasoning through standardized evaluation, LingLan establishes a unified, quantitative, and extensible foundation for advancing TCM LLMs and domain-specific medical AI research. All evaluation data and code are available at https://github.com/TCMAI-BJTU/LingLan and http://tcmnlp.com.

cs.AI

The Role of AI in Facilitating Interdisciplinary Collaboration: Evidence from AlphaFold

The acceleration of artificial intelligence (AI) in science is recognized and many scholars have begun to explore its role in interdisciplinary collaboration. However, the mechanisms and extent of this impact are still unclear. This study, using AlphaFold's impact on structural biologists, examines how AI technologies influence interdisciplinary collaborative patterns. By analyzing 1,247 AlphaFold-related papers and 7,700 authors from Scopus, we employ bibliometric analysis and causal inference to compare interdisciplinary collaboration between AlphaFold adopters and non-adopters. Contrary to the widespread belief that AI facilitates interdisciplinary collaboration, our findings show that AlphaFold increased structural biology-computer science collaborations by just 0.48%, with no measurable effect on other disciplines. Specifically, AI creates interdisciplinary collaboration demands with specific disciplines due to its technical characteristics, but this demand is weakened by technological democratization and other factors. These findings demonstrate that artificial intelligence (AI) alone has limited efficacy in bridging disciplinary divides or fostering meaningful interdisciplinary collaboration.

cs.DL