← Back to all news
arXiv AI By Mihai Codreanu, Alex Imas, Juan Mateos-Garcia, Joseph Emmens, Evalyne Muiruri, Arthur Turrell, Julian Jacobs, Atoosa Kasirzadeh, Ana Trisovic, Yiyuan Chen, Tanya Rodchenko, Catherine Pollard, Scott Strand, Daniel Rock, Zanna Iscenko, Fabien Curto Millet, Neil Thompson, James Manyika

AI in Science: Early Insights

Read the original on arXiv AI →

The paper "AI in Science: Early Insights" analyzes AI’s impact on scientific work using data from 15 million Gemini interactions, 2,600 specialized AI models, and a survey of 600 scientists. It finds widespread AI adoption, complementary use of large language models and specialized tools, significant productivity gains of about seven hours per week, and a shift in research bottlenecks toward hypothesis backlog and verification needs. The study suggests AI can boost scientific productivity but its full effect depends on addressing new downstream challenges.

Machine-generated by The Flow from the publisher's headline and feed description — not written or checked by a human. The full article lives at arXiv AI.

Related stories

arXiv AI
Sep 16

The AI-Enabled Scientific Frontier

The paper "The AI-Enabled Scientific Frontier" analyzes 2,507 head‑to‑head comparisons of AI versus other scientific methods across 27 disciplines from 2000 to early 2025. It finds that AI often outperforms traditional statistics but at higher computational cost, while in about a quarter of cases AI is both more expensive and less effective. Compared to scientific computing, AI usually underperforms but at lower cost, though since 2020 its performance has improved, now surpassing computing in over half of the comparisons.

By Gabriel Manso, Emma Fu, Neil Thompson
More like this →