From Text to Discovery: How Large Language Models Are Accelerating and Complicating Research Across Scientific and Humanistic Disciplines

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2606.08723v2
• Date: Tue, 09 Jun 2026 13:19:37 GMT
• Title: From Text to Discovery: How Large Language Models Are Accelerating and Complicating Research Across Scientific and Humanistic Disciplines
• Abstract summary: Large Language Models (LLMs) are rapidly reshaping academic research across the natural sciences, social sciences, and humanities.<n>This paper outlines an agenda for their responsible integration into scientific research.<n>We identify ten underexplored challenges, including the erosion of researcher autonomy, AI-driven confirmation bias, authorship ambiguity, and unequal access to these technologies.
• Score: 4.953914351662556
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Large Language Models (LLMs) are rapidly reshaping academic research across the natural sciences, social sciences, and humanities, yet the scientific community lacks a comprehensive, cross-disciplinary account of how these tools are being integrated, what they deliver, and where they fall short. This paper addresses that gap by mapping their current state and outlining an agenda for their responsible integration into scientific research. Our analysis reveals a consistent pattern: LLMs meaningfully accelerate research workflows -- from hypothesis generation and literature synthesis to data analysis and scientific writing -- while introducing serious challenges related to hallucination, reproducibility, dataset bias, and model opacity. Beyond technical limitations, we identify ten underexplored challenges, including the erosion of researcher autonomy, AI-driven confirmation bias, authorship ambiguity, and unequal access to these technologies -- systemic risks that demand interdisciplinary governance frameworks, robust validation standards, and expanded explainability research.

Related papers

• Personalized Auto-Research: Towards a True AI Co-Scientist [90.01790420664169]
  Given a research goal, state-of-the-art systems remain researcher-agnostic.<n>What counts as novel, valuable, or feasible depends on the researcher.<n>We propose a framework that threads a graph-grounded researcher context through retrieval, hypothesis search, experimentation, writing, and review.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-14T20:43:27Z)
• SciExplore: Evaluating Autonomous Agents from Scientific Navigation to Information Integration [46.64739473662869]
  We introduce SciExplore, a benchmark designed to evaluate scientific information-seeking and reasoning capabilities of LLMs and agents.<n> SciExplore comprises four task types covering 103 expert-curated tasks across more than ten scientific disciplines.<n>We evaluate over ten state-of-the-art LLMs and autonomous agents on SciExplore, revealing substantial performance gaps with performance degrading sharply as task complexity increases and extremely low accuracy on the most challenging structured tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-07-23T05:17:00Z)
• PaperMind: Benchmarking Agentic Reasoning and Critique over Scientific Papers in Multimodal LLMs [68.27437550335709]
  We introduce PaperMind, a benchmark designed to evaluate integrated and agent-oriented scientific reasoning over research papers.<n>PaperMind is constructed from real scientific papers across seven domains, including agriculture, biology, chemistry, computer science, medicine, physics, and economics.<n>By analyzing model behavior across multiple tasks, PaperMind enables a diagnostic evaluation of integrated scientific reasoning behaviors.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-23T05:42:39Z)
• Opportunities in AI/ML for the Rubin LSST Dark Energy Science Collaboration [63.61423859450929]
  This white paper surveys the current landscape of AI/ML across DESC's primary cosmological probes and cross-cutting analyses.<n>We identify key methodological research priorities, including Bayesian inference at scale, physics-informed methods, validation frameworks, and active learning for discovery.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-20T18:46:42Z)
• Autonomous Agents for Scientific Discovery: Orchestrating Scientists, Language, Code, and Physics [82.55776608452017]
  Large language models (LLMs) provide a flexible and versatile framework that orchestrates interactions with human scientists, natural language, computer language and code, and physics.<n>This paper presents our view and vision of LLM-based scientific agents and their growing role in transforming the scientific discovery lifecycle.<n>We identify open research challenges and outline promising directions for building more robust, generalizable, and adaptive scientific agents.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-10T22:26:26Z)
• A Survey of Scientific Large Language Models: From Data Foundations to Agent Frontiers [251.23085679210206]
  Scientific Large Language Models (Sci-LLMs) are transforming how knowledge is represented, integrated, and applied in scientific research.<n>This survey reframes the development of Sci-LLMs as a co-evolution between models and their underlying data substrate.<n>We formulate a unified taxonomy of scientific data and a hierarchical model of scientific knowledge.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-28T18:30:52Z)
• Demystifying Scientific Problem-Solving in LLMs by Probing Knowledge and Reasoning [53.82037883518254]
  We introduce SciReas, a diverse suite of existing benchmarks for scientific reasoning tasks.<n>We then propose KRUX, a probing framework for studying the distinct roles of reasoning and knowledge in scientific tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-26T17:04:23Z)
• The Evolving Role of Large Language Models in Scientific Innovation: Evaluator, Collaborator, and Scientist [3.7803247326675162]
  Scientific innovation is undergoing a paradigm shift driven by the rapid advancement of Large Language Models (LLMs)<n>This survey proposes a comprehensive framework to categorize the evolving roles of LLMs in scientific innovation across three hierarchical levels: Evaluator, Collaborator, and Scientist.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-16T00:11:01Z)
• The Next Phase of Scientific Fact-Checking: Advanced Evidence Retrieval from Complex Structured Academic Papers [11.88478056313921]
  The problem is inherently more complex than general fact-checking since it must accommodate the evolving nature of scientific knowledge.<n>Existing approaches focus on simplified versions of the problem based on small-scale datasets consisting of abstracts.<n>This paper examines the limitations of current scientific fact-checking systems and reveals the potential features and resources that could be exploited to advance their performance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-25T21:29:33Z)
• Transforming Science with Large Language Models: A Survey on AI-assisted Scientific Discovery, Experimentation, Content Generation, and Evaluation [58.064940977804596]
  A plethora of new AI models and tools has been proposed, promising to empower researchers and academics worldwide to conduct their research more effectively and efficiently.<n>Ethical concerns regarding shortcomings of these tools and potential for misuse take a particularly prominent place in our discussion.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-07T18:26:45Z)
• Uni-SMART: Universal Science Multimodal Analysis and Research Transformer [22.90687836544612]
  We present bfUni-text, an innovative model designed for in-depth understanding of scientific literature. Uni-text demonstrates superior performance over other text-focused LLMs. Our exploration extends to practical applications, including patent infringement detection and nuanced analysis of charts.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-15T13:43:47Z)
• An Interdisciplinary Outlook on Large Language Models for Scientific Research [3.4108358650013573]
  We describe the capabilities and constraints of Large Language Models (LLMs) within disparate academic disciplines, aiming to delineate their strengths and limitations with precision. We examine how LLMs augment scientific inquiry, offering concrete examples such as accelerating literature review by summarizing vast numbers of publications. We articulate the challenges LLMs face, including their reliance on extensive and sometimes biased datasets, and the potential ethical dilemmas stemming from their use.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-03T19:41:09Z)
• Automating Ambiguity: Challenges and Pitfalls of Artificial Intelligence [0.0]
  This thesis weaves together seemingly disparate fields of enquiry to examine core scientific and ethical challenges, pitfalls, and problems of AI. The various challenges, problems and pitfalls of these systems are a hot topic of research in various areas, such as critical data/algorithm studies, science and technology studies (STS), embodied and enactive cognitive science, complexity science, Afro-feminism, and the broadly construed emerging field of Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency (FAccT)
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-06-08T22:05:07Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.