Scientific Knowledge Discovery in the Age of Large Language Models

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2607.26670v1
• Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2026 09:25:55 GMT
• Title: Scientific Knowledge Discovery in the Age of Large Language Models
• Abstract summary: Generative large language models (LLMs) offer a more flexible alternative to conventional search systems.<n>This chapter surveys 34 peer-reviewed papers applying generative LLMs to literature retrieval and the screening of candidate studies.
• Score: 0.16732809353184305
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: The rapid growth of scholarly literature has made identifying relevant publications increasingly difficult, and conventional search systems still depend heavily on manually formulated queries and effortful manual inspection. Generative large language models (LLMs) offer a more flexible alternative, supporting literature retrieval and the screening of candidate studies against eligibility criteria. This chapter surveys 34 peer-reviewed papers applying generative LLMs to these two tasks, identified via a Boolean search over the OpenAIRE Graph (1,589 records screened to 34 inclusions). Reviewed studies are characterised by LLMs employed, model access and adaptation, prompting and architectural techniques, ground-truth sources, and evaluation metrics.

Related papers

• WisPaper: Your AI Scholar Search Engine [55.07907253175705]
  textscWisPaper is an intelligent academic retrieval and literature management platform.<n>It provides a closed-loop workflow that seamlessly connects literature discovery, management, and continuous tracking of research frontiers.<n>The platform is publicly accessible and serves researchers across academia and industry.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-12-07T15:10:20Z)
• How Do LLM-Generated Texts Impact Term-Based Retrieval Models? [76.92519309816008]
  This paper investigates the influence of large language models (LLMs) on term-based retrieval models.<n>Our linguistic analysis reveals that LLM-generated texts exhibit smoother high-frequency and steeper low-frequency Zipf slopes.<n>Our study further explores whether term-based retrieval models demonstrate source bias, concluding that these models prioritize documents whose term distributions closely correspond to those of the queries.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-25T06:43:27Z)
• Let's Use ChatGPT To Write Our Paper! Benchmarking LLMs To Write the Introduction of a Research Paper [64.50822834679101]
  SciIG is a task that evaluates LLMs' ability to produce coherent introductions from titles, abstracts, and related works.<n>We assess five state-of-the-art models, including open-source (DeepSeek-v3, Gemma-3-12B, LLaMA 4-Maverick, MistralAI Small 3.1) and closed-source GPT-4o systems.<n>Results demonstrate LLaMA-4 Maverick's superior performance on most metrics, particularly in semantic similarity and faithfulness.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-19T21:11:11Z)
• A Systematic Literature Review of Retrieval-Augmented Generation: Techniques, Metrics, and Challenges [1.774905308388066]
  This systematic review of the research literature on retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) provides a focused analysis of the most highly cited studies published between 2020 and 2025.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-08T15:37:14Z)
• Can LLMs Generate Tabular Summaries of Science Papers? Rethinking the Evaluation Protocol [83.90769864167301]
  Literature review tables are essential for summarizing and comparing collections of scientific papers.<n>We explore the task of generating tables that best fulfill a user's informational needs given a collection of scientific papers.<n>Our contributions focus on three key challenges encountered in real-world use: (i) User prompts are often under-specified; (ii) Retrieved candidate papers frequently contain irrelevant content; and (iii) Task evaluation should move beyond shallow text similarity techniques.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-14T14:52:28Z)
• A Reproducibility and Generalizability Study of Large Language Models for Query Generation [14.172158182496295]
  generative AI and large language models (LLMs) promise to revolutionize the systematic literature review process. This paper presents an extensive study of Boolean query generation using LLMs for systematic reviews. Our study investigates the replicability and reliability of results achieved using ChatGPT. We then generalize our results by analyzing and evaluating open-source models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-22T13:15:03Z)
• Are Large Language Models Good Classifiers? A Study on Edit Intent Classification in Scientific Document Revisions [62.12545440385489]
  Large language models (LLMs) have brought substantial advancements in text generation, but their potential for enhancing classification tasks remains underexplored. We propose a framework for thoroughly investigating fine-tuning LLMs for classification, including both generation- and encoding-based approaches. We instantiate this framework in edit intent classification (EIC), a challenging and underexplored classification task.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-02T20:48:28Z)
• Instruct Large Language Models to Generate Scientific Literature Survey Step by Step [21.149406605689297]
  We design prompts to systematically leverage large language models (LLMs) We argue that this design enables the generation of the headings from a high-level perspective. Our implementation with Qwen-long achieved third place in the NLPCC 2024 Scientific Literature Survey Generation evaluation task.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-15T02:07:11Z)
• ResearchArena: Benchmarking Large Language Models' Ability to Collect and Organize Information as Research Agents [30.603079363363634]
  This study introduces ResearchArena, a benchmark designed to evaluate large language models' capabilities in conducting academic surveys.<n>ResearchArena models the process in three stages: (1) information discovery, identifying relevant literature; (2) information selection, evaluating papers' relevance and impact; and (3) information organization.<n>To support these evaluations, we construct an offline environment of 12M full-text academic papers and 7.9K survey papers.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-13T03:26:30Z)
• If the Sources Could Talk: Evaluating Large Language Models for Research Assistance in History [1.3325600043256554]
  We show that by augmenting Large-Language Models with vector embeddings from highly specialized academic sources, a conversational methodology can be made accessible to historians and other researchers in the Humanities. Compared to established search interfaces for digital catalogues, such as metadata and full-text search, we evaluate the richer conversational style of LLMs on the performance of two main types of tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-16T20:12:06Z)
• Information Extraction in Low-Resource Scenarios: Survey and Perspective [56.5556523013924]
  Information Extraction seeks to derive structured information from unstructured texts. This paper presents a review of neural approaches to low-resource IE from emphtraditional and emphLLM-based perspectives.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-02-16T13:44:00Z)

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.