https://arxiv.org/api/LAf2p5ax8WmUabsdIbvPhCEMWDI 2026-06-10T01:45:14Z 6060 75 15 http://arxiv.org/abs/2602.15249v2 2026-05-14T00:30:42Z

This study examines the distribution of Artificial Intelligence (AI) research across European NUTS-3 regions during the period 2015-2024. Using bibliometric data from Clarivate InCites and the Citation Topics classification system, we analyse two hierarchical thematic levels: Electrical Engineering, Electronics & Computer Science (Macro Citation Topic 4) and Artificial Intelligence & Machine Learning (Meso Citation Topic 4.61). Relative Specialization Index (RSI) and Relative Citation Impact (RCI) indicators are calculated for 781 European NUTS-3 regions. While major metropolitan hubs such as Paris, Warszawa, and Madrid dominate in absolute publication volume, the results reveal that the highest levels of relative AI specialization are concentrated in peripheral regions, particularly in Eastern Europe and Spain. Granada and Vilniaus apskritis stand out as regions combining high specialization with strong citation visibility. The analysis further suggests a weak relationship between regional specialization and citation impact, revealing multiple regional profiles, including highly specialized regions with limited citation visibility, highly visible regions with comparatively low specialization, and diversified scientific systems combining moderate specialization with strong citation impact. Fyn emerges as an extreme case of very high citation impact despite relatively low specialization.

2026-02-16T23:01:14Z 15 pages, 3 figures Victor Herrero-Solana Carmen Gálvez http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.14188v1 2026-05-13T23:10:15Z

What does a book look like to a quantum computer? This paper takes eight classical works of the Renaissance and its late-antique inheritance -- from Augustine to Galileo -- and runs each through a neutral-atom quantum processor. The bridge is graphs: each textual unit becomes an atom, and graph edges are physical blockade constraints for engineered exact unit-disk designs, or a 2D approximation to the semantic graph for natural texts. Three contributions follow. First, we introduce rigidity rho, a metric for how unique a book's structural backbone is -- distinguishing Marguerite de Navarre's Heptameron (rigid, twelve-nouvelle hard core) from Boethius (fully fungible, every chapter substitutable). Second, we invert the pipeline: rather than extracting a graph from existing prose, we pick a target graph the hardware encodes natively, and write a book whose structure matches it. The twenty-nine texts written this way, collected under the name QOuLiPo, extend the OuLiPo tradition to graph-topological constraints and, together with the eight natural texts, form a benchmark distribution against which neutral-atom hardware can be tracked as it scales. Third, we run both natural and engineered texts on Pasqal's FRESNEL processor up to one hundred atoms; engineered texts reach high approximation ratios, the cleanest instances returning the exact backbone. A cloud-accessible quantum machine plus an agentic coding environment now lets a single investigator run this pipeline end-to-end. What is reported is an application layer, not a speedup -- humanistic instances ready to load onto neutral-atom processors as they scale, already complementing classical text analysis. The Digital Humanities community has a stake in building familiarity with this hardware now: the engineered-corpus design choices made today fix the benchmark distribution future hardware will be measured against.

2026-05-13T23:10:15Z Christophe Jurczak http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.13310v1 2026-05-13T10:25:43Z

We present SemRepo, an RDF knowledge graph comprising over 81 million triples describing nearly 200,000 GitHub repositories associated with scientific research. SemRepo captures repository-level metadata, such as contributors, issues, and programming languages, and interlinks this information with external scholarly knowledge graphs. In particular, repository authors are linked to their profiles in SemOpenAlex, repositories are connected to scholarly publications in LPWC, and research artifacts, such as datasets and experiments, are linked via MLSea-KG. This integration enables queries that span publications and their scholarly artifacts, which are typically fragmented across separate platforms. SemRepo supports analyses that are difficult to perform with existing resources in isolation, including provenance reconstruction across repositories and publications, as well as the systematic identification of risks to research reproducibility and software sustainability. By unifying research software with its scholarly context in a single graph, SemRepo provides an important infrastructure for large-scale analysis of software within the broader scientific research ecosystem.

2026-05-13T10:25:43Z Abdul Rafay Yuni Susanti David Lamprecht Michael Färber http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06033v3 2026-05-12T16:30:30Z

The extent to which Artificial Intelligence (AI) technologies can trigger generalized paradigm shifts in science is unclear. Although these technologies have revolutionized data collection and analysis in specific fields, their overall impact depends on the scope and ways of adoption. We analyze over 227 million scholarly works from the OpenAlex collection (1960-2024) spanning four scientific domains and 46 fields. To distinguish the use of AI as research method (AI adoption) from mentioning AI-related terms (AI engagement), we developed a two-step AI-assisted semantic classification pipeline, validated through human coding of 911 abstracts and a robustness check on 348,000 full-text articles (PLOS One). We document differences in the timing and extent of AI adoption across domains, with generalized exponential growth after 2015. The transformative nature of this growth, however, is less apparent. AI-supported research is confined to a few topics with strong ties to Computer Science and conventional statistical frameworks, suggesting limited epistemological transformation. It is also associated with an unwarranted citation premium and substantially higher retraction rates than non-AI-supported. Geographically, while wealthy countries lead in AI publications per capita, global South countries in a belt from Indonesia to Algeria lead in AI adoption relative to their national output, signaling a distinctive resource concentration pattern. The transformative capacity of AI in science thus remains untapped, and its rapid adoption underlines challenges in research openness, transparency, reproducibility, and ethics. We discuss how best research practices could boost the benefits of AI adoption and highlight areas that warrant closer scrutiny.

2026-05-07T11:23:23Z Andrés F. Castro Torres Joan Giner-Miguelez Mercè Crosas http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.12263v1 2026-05-12T15:28:39Z

Citation graphs are fundamental tools for modeling scientific structure, but are often fragmented due to missing citations of scientifically connected articles. To address this issue, we propose a computationally efficient hybrid framework integrating citation topology with large language model (LLM)-based text similarity. Using 662,369 Web of Science publications in Mathematics and Operations Research & Management Science, we augment the original graph by adding semantic edges from small, disconnected components and weighting existing citations according to textual similarity. Semantic augmentation substantially reduces fragmentation while preserving disciplinary homogeneity. Compared to embedding-only clustering, cluster detection on augmented graphs using the Leiden algorithm retains structural interpretability while offering multi-scale organization. The method scales efficiently to large datasets and offers a practical strategy for strengthening citation-based indicators without collapsing disciplinary boundaries.

2026-05-12T15:28:39Z 11 pages, 4 figures, 3 tables Vu Thi Huong Annika Buchholz Imene Khebouri Thorsten Koch Tim Kunt Wolfgang Peters-Kottig Tomasz Stompor Janina Zittel http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.12187v1 2026-05-12T14:30:19Z

Paper mills produce fraudulent research manuscripts built on recycled tables and figures, or on entirely fabricated data. A more recent pattern has emerged: apparently genuine trials with real patients, but with manipulated statistical analyses engineered to support regulatory approval while remaining plausible to peer reviewers. This analysis applies the INSPECT-SR trustworthiness framework to 23 randomised controlled trials and post-marketing studies linked to CinnaGen Co., Iran's largest biosimilar manufacturer, and its clinical operations subsidiary Orchid Pharmed. Papers were retrieved from PubMed and assessed against the original study records. A total of 180 problems were identified across nine categories. The five most frequent issues were reporting failures (n=37), arithmetic violations (n=28), design flaws (n=26), registration irregularities (n=25), and statistical errors (n=25). Analysis of the co authorship network shows that trial design, data management, and manuscript preparation were concentrated within the sponsoring organisation. The underlying structural drivers appear to be a convergence of domestic publication incentives, commercial pressure from international sanctions that created demand for domestically produced drugs, and regulatory pathways that require this body of trial evidence. Because this pattern differs fundamentally from classical paper mills, we propose the term clinical trial engineering to describe it. Regulatory bodies, including the European Medicines Agency (EMA), should treat published clinical evidence from this cluster as unverified until independent access to individual participant data is granted

2026-05-12T14:30:19Z 23 pages, 1 table, 3 figures, 37 references Matthias Wjst http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.09236v2 2026-05-12T12:29:41Z

While digitized corpora have transformed the study of intellectual transmission, current methods rely heavily on lexical text reuse detection, capturing verbatim quotations but fundamentally missing paraphrases and complex implicit engagement. This paper evaluates semantic search in 18th-century intellectual history through the reception of John Locke's foundational work. Using expert annotation grounded in a semantic taxonomy, we examine whether an off-the-shelf semantic search pipeline can surface meaning-level correspondences overlooked by lexical methods. Our results demonstrate that semantic search retrieves substantially more implicit receptions than lexical baselines. However, linguistic diagnostics also reveal a "lexical gatekeeping" effect, where retrieval remains partially constrained by surface vocabulary overlap. These findings highlight both the potential and the limitations of semantic retrieval for analyzing the circulation of ideas in large historical corpora. The data is available at https://github.com/COMHIS/locke-sim-data.

2026-05-10T00:34:46Z Accepted by NLP4DH 2026 Yu Wu Ananth Mahadevan Filip Ginter Michael Mathioudakis Mikko Tolonen http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.11930v1 2026-05-12T10:44:16Z

This exploratory study examines how low-impact journals, defined through subject-normalized Eigenfactor percentiles, are associated with denser and more reciprocating patterns of author-to-author citations. Using Crossref records, we assign journals to broad subject areas, compute subject-specific Eigenfactor scores, propagate venue quality to works and authors, match authors in low- (Case) versus high-influence (Control) venues by subject and h5, and analyze citation edges for cohesion and anomalies. Across a 10% sample of 9,431 matched pairs, authors in low-impact venues exhibit significantly higher cohesion: 6.7x higher co-author citation rates and 4.7x higher reciprocity in the aggregate Case-Control comparison. A subject-aware hybrid detection pipeline flags 277 outliers with 93.5% Case purity; these outliers display an 11x clique-strength lift relative to non-outliers, revealing a stark "Two Worlds" segregation (r = 0.71) where low-impact venues operate as closed citation economies. The largest detected component (n = 23) displays a hub-and-spoke topology in which peripheral "Sycophants" funnel citations to central "Beneficiaries" through coordinated bursts, confirming a directed flow imbalance rather than reciprocal exchange among equals. Overall, cohesion, rather than broad asymmetry, accounts for the main Case-Control differences, suggesting that low-impact venues foster segregated, inward-looking citation economies that distort bibliometric indicators.

2026-05-12T10:44:16Z 38 pages, 8 figures Panagiotis-Alexios Spanakis Grigorios Alexandrou Diomidis Spinellis http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.11902v1 2026-05-12T10:15:15Z

Scholarly blogs have become an important venue for scholarly communication, yet they remain insufficiently integrated into digital research and information infrastructures, which places their long-term preservation and citability at risk. This study investigates what challenges German scholarly bloggers perceive concerning blog preservation and what requirements they articulate for a sustainable information infrastructure. Drawing on Star and Ruhleder's (1996) dimensions of information infrastructure as a theoretical lens, we conducted and qualitatively analyzed 13 semi-structured interviews with scholarly bloggers. The analysis reveals three connected themes. First, bloggers perceive a structural deficit in institutional responsibility and support: the long-term preservation of blogs is not systematically assumed by libraries, universities, or platforms, while bloggers are not sufficiently supported by their affiliated institutions. Second, bloggers articulate heterogeneous requirements like persistent identifiers, structured metadata, technical interoperability, and organizational sustainability. Third, governance preferences are characterized by distrust toward commercial and public infrastructures, compounded by concerns about geopolitical dependencies on non-European platforms. These findings demonstrate that no single centralized infrastructure can adequately address the diverse and context-dependent needs of bloggers. We argue for a decentralized information infrastructure for scholarly blogs and offer concrete recommendations for information infrastructure facilities, platform providers, bloggers and research performing organizations.

2026-05-12T10:15:15Z 15 pages, 1 figure, 3 tables Catharina Ochsner Heinz Pampel http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.22026v2 2026-05-11T19:36:02Z

AI research pipelines can now generate academic work that may satisfy existing peer review standards for quality, novelty, and methodological rigor. However, the publication system was built around the assumption that research is produced by human authors. It therefore lacks a clear way to evaluate work when the knowledge claim may be valid but the producer is partly or fully automated. This paper proposes a two-layer certification framework for AI-generated research. The first layer evaluates whether the knowledge claim is sound. The second layer evaluates the level of human contribution. This separation allows journals and conferences to assess pipeline-generated work more consistently without creating new institutions. The framework uses normative analysis, conceptual design, and dry-run validation against representative submission cases. It classifies human contribution into three categories: Category A, where the work is reachable by an automated pipeline; Category B, where human direction is required at identifiable stages; and Category C, where the work goes beyond current pipeline capability, especially at the problem-formulation stage. The paper also proposes dedicated benchmark slots for fully disclosed automated research. These slots would provide a transparent publication path and help reviewers calibrate judgments over time. The key argument is that publication has historically certified two things at once: that the knowledge is valid and that a human produced it. AI research pipelines separate these two claims. By decoupling knowledge certification from authorship attribution, the proposed framework responds to a structural change already underway. It can be implemented within existing editorial systems, works even when attribution is uncertain, and recognizes human frontier contribution based on epistemic value rather than human origin alone.

2026-04-23T19:40:53Z correct references Yang Lu Rabimba Karanjai Lei Xu Weidong Shi http://arxiv.org/abs/2507.11810v2 2026-05-11T19:19:50Z

Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used in scientific research and discovery, supporting tasks ranging from literature retrieval and synthesis to hypothesis generation, autonomous experimentation, and research evaluation. Existing surveys often conflate scientific research with scientific discovery and typically organize systems by domain, task, or autonomy level alone. In this survey, we propose a four-role framework for understanding LLMs in scientific innovation: Assistant, Collaborator, Scientist, and Evaluator. The framework integrates three complementary dimensions: autonomy level, cognitive function, and scientific innovation, to distinguish research-oriented support from frontier-oriented discovery. We review representative methods, benchmarks, and evaluation practices for each role, examining their capabilities, limitations, and human oversight requirements. Across the literature, Assistant systems are comparatively mature in retrieval and synthesis but remain unreliable in open-ended applications; Collaborator systems expand the space of candidate hypotheses yet struggle with novelty-grounding trade-offs; Scientist systems increasingly automate research workflows but face reliability and safety bottlenecks; and Evaluator systems support review and verification while remaining weak in novelty assessment. We argue that progress in AI for science depends not only on model capability, but also on evaluation, oversight, accountability, and institutional integration.

2025-07-16T00:11:01Z Haoxuan Zhang Ruochi Li Yang Zhang Ting Xiao Jiangping Chen Junhua Ding Haihua Chen http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.16377v1 2026-05-10T22:58:01Z

Transparent and standardized reporting is essential for reproducible scientific research, yet adherence to reporting guidelines remains inconsistent because of the manual effort required to select and complete checklists. We present CheckSupport, an open-source, locally deployable system that uses large language models to automate the recommendation of reporting checklists and the evidence-grounded completion of checklists for scientific manuscripts. CheckSupport employs a staged prompting strategy that decomposes reporting workflows into constrained inference tasks, prioritizing faithful extraction over generative text synthesis. All inference is performed locally using instruction-tuned models, preserving data privacy and enabling reproducible, auditable workflows. Evaluated on a corpus of peer-reviewed manuscripts, CheckSupport achieved 90% overall accuracy for checklist recommendations and 88% overall accuracy for item-level completion while operating on CPU-only hardware. On average, the wall-clock time per manuscript was 12.5 seconds, including the checklist recommendation and full checklist completion. These results demonstrate that large language models, when applied as structured inference components, can reduce reporting burden and support more transparent and reproducible scientific reporting across disciplines.

2026-05-10T22:58:01Z Satvik Tripathi Don Enwerem Kevin Song Kristian Quevada Jacinta Arnold Tessa S. Cook http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.28843v1 2026-05-10T16:17:41Z

AI is transforming life sciences research at unprecedented speed, accelerating discovery across protein structure prediction, genome modeling, and drug development (Jumper et al., 2021; Mak et al., 2024). Yet this rapid advancement, coupled with the open science movement, introduces significant dual-use research concerns that have received limited empirical scrutiny. Here we present the first systematic analysis of dual-use research of concern (DURC) content on open preprint servers. We screened ~52,000 bioRxiv preprints (2024-2025) using a hybrid pipeline of lexical filtering and large language model (LLM) evaluation, scoring metadata across nine DURC, three PEPP, and five governance categories aligned with U.S. and Australia Group oversight frameworks. Our analysis reveals that dual-use-adjacent knowledge is routinely present in openly accessible titles and abstracts, often exceeding established risk thresholds even in studies with legitimate public health objectives. While this mapping captures surface-level information diffusion, it does not measure operational capability, downstream misuse potential, or the substantial technical and biosafety barriers that constrain harmful application. We argue that institutional review processes, funding requirements, and preprint platform policies must evolve to incorporate proactive, metadata-level monitoring without compromising scientific transparency. Ultimately, harmonizing controlled-access mechanisms for high-risk methodologies with open summaries of scientific contributions offers a pragmatic framework for governing AI-accelerated biology at scale.

2026-05-10T16:17:41Z Ongoing work Vasudha Sharma Chakresh Kumar Singh Jayesh Choudhari Dharmit Nakrani http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.08889v1 2026-05-09T11:13:21Z

Machine learning research has grown exponentially while its communication norms have not. We argue NeurIPS should adopt explicit, measurable writing standards. We analyze 2.8 million arXiv papers (1991-2025), 24,772 NeurIPS papers (1987-2024), and 24.5 million PubMed papers (1990-2025), applying classical readability scores, the Hohmann writing style suite (including sensational language), acronym density and reuse, an LLM as judge readability protocol, and citations from OpenAlex and Semantic Scholar. Four patterns emerge. First, NeurIPS abstracts score harder to read on every classical readability metric: Flesch Reading Ease falls from about 24 in 1987 to 13 in 2024, and sensational language rises by about 50 percent in NeurIPS abstracts between 2015 and 2024. Second, acronym density in NeurIPS titles has grown from 0.33 per 100 words in 1987 to 3.21 in 2024, and about 89 percent of NeurIPS acronyms are used fewer than ten times, ten points above the science-wide baseline. Third, more readable NeurIPS papers tend to receive more citations, suggesting readability and impact are correlated and that less readable papers risk remaining fragmented. LLM as judge scores rate NeurIPS abstracts as roughly stable from 1987 to 2022, with early signs of improvement thereafter, a pattern that disagrees with every classical readability metric and raises a design question for enforcement: is the target reader a human or an LLM? Lastly, NeurIPS volume has grown roughly 50-fold between 1987 and 2024. Assuming the goal is to optimise for human readers, we propose seven standards NeurIPS could pilot at NeurIPS 2027: an acronym budget with a venue-approved term list, a human readability threshold, stricter citation standards, standalone visual elements, a plain language summary, a pre-registered acronym glossary, and open source audit tooling.

2026-05-09T11:13:21Z 9 pages, 11 figures, 7 tables Ajay Mandyam Rangarajan Jeyashree Krishnan http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.08869v1 2026-05-09T10:42:48Z

Recent artificial intelligence has developed rapidly with significant interdisciplinary expansion, yet existing studies often treat it as a whole, lacking systematic long-term subfield comparisons and structural analyses, thereby limiting understanding of internal differences and evolutionary mechanisms. To address this gap, we employ bibliometric methods, using expert interviews and indicator screening to construct an analytical framework. Twelve bibliometric indicators are selected across three dimensions: Impact and Dissemination, Collaboration Characteristics, and Author Characteristics. We conduct horizontal and longitudinal analyses of five subfields (AI, CV, ML, NLP, Web\&IR) from 2000 to 2024. Using CSRankings classification and a dataset of 106,622 papers, we apply violin plots, chord diagrams, and sankey diagrams to characterize structural features and evolutionary paths. Results show that these subfields have entered high-intensity knowledge diffusion: academic impact increased, knowledge dissemination accelerated, external disciplinary reliance grown, and knowledge production shifted from closed accumulation to open, interdisciplinary, multi-actor networks. On this basis, subfields exhibit significant structural differentiation: CV leads in academic impact with a task-oriented trajectory; ML shows shrinking industry collaboration but concentrated international collaboration with a relatively dispersed structure; Web\&IR is strongly industry-driven with a stable collaboration network; AI shows continuous growth; NLP remains relatively stable. Overall, this study reveals artificial intelligence evolving from unified diffusion to structural differentiation, constructs an extensible multidimensional framework, and provides a quantitative approach for understanding complex technological field evolution.

2026-05-09T10:42:48Z 66 pages, 28 figures Zeyu Li Yalan Jin Shuyu Chen Tingxin Jiang Xinyi Chang Lu Yuan