Suppr超能文献

通过将期刊转变为学习社区,利用人工智能提升科学交流。

Using AI to enhance scientific discourse by transforming journals into learning communities.

作者信息

Rowe Michael

机构信息

School of Health and Care Sciences, University of Lincoln, Lincoln - UK.

出版信息

Arch Physiother. 2025 May 5;15:90-96. doi: 10.33393/aop.2025.3442. eCollection 2025 Jan-Dec.

Abstract

The introduction of generative AI into scientific publishing presents both opportunities and risks for the research ecosystem. While AI could enhance knowledge creation and streamline research processes, it may also amplify existing problems within the system. In this viewpoint article, I suggest that generative AI is likely to reinforce harmful processes unless scientific journals and editors use these technologies to transform themselves into vibrant knowledge communities that facilitate meaningful discourse and collaborative learning. I describe how AI could support this transformation by surfacing connections between researchers' work, making peer review more dialogic, enhancing post-publication discourse, and enabling multimodal knowledge translation. However, implementing this vision faces significant challenges, deeply rooted in the entrenched incentives of the current academic publishing system. Universities evaluate faculty based largely on publication counts, funding bodies rely on traditional metrics for grant decisions, and publishers benefit from maintaining existing models. Making meaningful change, therefore, requires coordinated action across multiple stakeholders who must be willing to accept short-term costs for long-term systemic benefits. The key to success lies in consistently returning to journals' core purpose: advancing scientific knowledge through thoughtful research and professional dialogue. By reimagining journals as AI-supported communities rather than metrics-driven repositories, we can better serve both the scientific community and the broader society it aims to benefit.

摘要

生成式人工智能引入科学出版领域,给研究生态系统带来了机遇和风险。虽然人工智能可以促进知识创造并简化研究流程,但它也可能加剧系统中现有的问题。在这篇观点文章中,我认为,除非科学期刊和编辑利用这些技术将自身转变为充满活力的知识社区,以促进有意义的交流和协作学习,否则生成式人工智能可能会强化有害流程。我描述了人工智能如何通过揭示研究人员工作之间的联系、使同行评审更具对话性、加强出版后交流以及实现多模态知识转化来支持这一转变。然而,实现这一愿景面临重大挑战,这些挑战深深植根于当前学术出版系统根深蒂固的激励机制之中。大学在很大程度上根据发表数量评估教师,资助机构在拨款决策时依赖传统指标,出版商则从维持现有模式中受益。因此,要做出有意义的改变,需要多个利益相关者采取协调行动,他们必须愿意为了长期的系统效益接受短期成本。成功的关键在于始终回归期刊的核心宗旨:通过深入的研究和专业对话推动科学知识发展。通过将期刊重新想象为人工智能支持的社区,而非指标驱动的知识库,我们能够更好地服务科学界以及它旨在造福的更广泛社会。

相似文献

2
A Learned Society's Perspective on Publishing.一个学术团体对出版的看法。
J Neurochem. 2016 Oct;139 Suppl 2:17-23. doi: 10.1111/jnc.13674. Epub 2016 Aug 17.
3
The future of Cochrane Neonatal.考克兰新生儿协作网的未来。
Early Hum Dev. 2020 Nov;150:105191. doi: 10.1016/j.earlhumdev.2020.105191. Epub 2020 Sep 12.
4
[The different models of scientific journals].[科学期刊的不同模式]
Med Trop Sante Int. 2023 Dec 8;3(4). doi: 10.48327/mtsi.v3i4.2023.454. eCollection 2023 Dec 31.

本文引用的文献

4
The Health Disparities Research Industrial Complex.卫生差异研究产业综合体。
Soc Sci Med. 2024 Jun;351:116251. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2023.116251. Epub 2023 Oct 19.
6
Slowed canonical progress in large fields of science.减缓了大型科学领域的规范进展。
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2021 Oct 12;118(41). doi: 10.1073/pnas.2021636118.
7
Scientific productivity: An exploratory study of metrics and incentives.科学产出:指标与激励的探索性研究。
PLoS One. 2018 Apr 3;13(4):e0195321. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0195321. eCollection 2018.
10
Post-publication peer review: opening up scientific conversation.发表后同行评审:开启科学对话。
Front Comput Neurosci. 2012 Aug 30;6:63. doi: 10.3389/fncom.2012.00063. eCollection 2012.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验