Writing is Thinking

This week, researchers at the University of Florida found that while AI can be a valuable assistant, it falls short of replacing human scientists in many critical areas.

The researchers tested how well popular generative AI models including OpenAI’s ChatGPT, Microsoft’s Copilot and Google’s Gemini could handle various stages of the research process. They put these AI systems through six stages of academic research – ideation, literature review, research design, documenting results, extending the research and final manuscript production – while limiting any human intervention. What they discovered was a mixed bag of capabilities and limitations.

Still, Japanese company Sakana announced this month that a paper written by its "AI Scientist" passed the peer review process at a top machine learning conference workshop, possibly the first time a fully AI-generated paper has passed the peer review process.

The company said: “We believe that the next generation of AI scientists will usher in a new era of science. The fact that AI can generate entire papers that pass peer review at top machine learning international conference workshops is a sure sign of progress to come. But this is just the beginning. AI will continue to improve,