Blog purpose

This BLOG is for LLNL present and past employees, friends of LLNL and anyone impacted by the privatization of the Lab to express their opinions and expose the waste, wrongdoing and any kind of injustice against employees and taxpayers by LLNS/DOE/NNSA. The opinions stated are personal opinions. Therefore, The BLOG author may or may not agree with them before making the decision to post them. THIS BLOG WILL NOT POST ANY MAGA PROPAGANDA OR ANY MISINFORMATION REGARDLESS OF SOURCE. Comments not conforming to BLOG rules are deleted. Blog author serves as a moderator. For new topics or suggestions, email jlscoob5@gmail.com

Blog rules

  • Stay on topic.
  • No profanity, threatening language, pornography.
  • NO NAME CALLING.
  • No political debate.
  • Posts and comments are posted several times a day.

Sunday, May 18, 2025

AI in Science

 New AI showing how AI increases scientific productivity. This should be must reading for all of the NNSA employees.                

Moderator's note:

Papers on arxiv are not peer-reviewed.


https://arxiv.org/abs/2412.17866

Artificial Intelligence, Scientific Discovery, and Product Innovation

Aidan Toner-Rodgers
This paper studies the impact of artificial intelligence on innovation, exploiting the randomized introduction of a new materials discovery technology to 1,018 scientists in the R&D lab of a large U.S. firm. AI-assisted researchers discover 44% more materials, resulting in a 39% increase in patent filings and a 17% rise in downstream product innovation. These compounds possess more novel chemical structures and lead to more radical inventions. However, the technology has strikingly disparate effects across the productivity distribution: while the bottom third of scientists see little benefit, the output of top researchers nearly doubles. Investigating the mechanisms behind these results, I show that AI automates 57% of "idea-generation" tasks, reallocating researchers to the new task of evaluating model-produced candidate materials. Top scientists leverage their domain knowledge to prioritize promising AI suggestions, while others waste significant resources testing false positives. Together, these findings demonstrate the potential of AI-augmented research and highlight the complementarity between algorithms and expertise in the innovative process. Survey evidence reveals that these gains come at a cost, however, as 82% of scientists report reduced satisfaction with their work due to decreased creativity and skill underutilizati
.

3 comments:

Anonymous said...

This paper was disavowed by MIT on 5/16/25. https://techcrunch.com/2025/05/17/mit-disavows-doctoral-students-paper-on-ai-productivity-benefits/

Anonymous said...

This paper was disavowed by MIT on 5/16/25. https://techcrunch.com/2025/05/17/mit-disavows-doctoral-students-paper-on-ai-productivity-benefits/


What? If you read the paper it sounds like it makes sense and rings true with what everyone is saying about AI. Is it just some minor error they can correct?

Anonymous said...

This article discusses it, evidently it may have been completely made up:

https://www.science.org/content/blog-post/whoa-now-cautionary-tales-materials-science

Posts you viewed tbe most last 30 days