跳到正文
研踪PaperTrail
← 研踪 PaperTrail

arXiv:2611.16833 · v1

Earlier citation practices are linked to signs of artificial intelligence use in scientific writing

首次提交 2026-11-12 22:06
版本更新 2026-11-12 22:06
雷达观测 2026-11-13 14:15
arXiv ↗PDF ↗

摘要

As artificial intelligence (AI) becomes more common in scientific writing, some authors show fewer signs of AI assistance than expected across successive periods. We analysed OpenAlex publication histories for 71,133 authors with at least one eligible first-authored English-language publication each year from 2023 through September 2026. Using abstract-based writing scores, we defined resistance as the predicted minus observed share of abstracts classified as AI-assisted. Positive scores indicate fewer such abstracts than expected. Early resistance was positively associated with later resistance, although the share with positive scores fell. Environmental characteristics contributed more than individual characteristics to predicting later scores, although overall predictive power was low. Having a collaborator with a non-positive early score was associated with lower subsequent resistance. Authors with positive mean scores in both 2023-2024 and 2025-2026 cited older work, drew on fewer subfields and more often cited sources they had used before than authors with non-positive mean scores in both periods. These differences were evident before 2023. The adjusted gap in reference reuse rose from 3.24 percentage points before 2023 to 7.95 in 2025-2026. The findings link variation in signs of AI assistance to earlier differences in how scientists used prior work.

AI 论文解读

基于摘要 · 非全文审阅

此版本尚未生成 AI 解读。解读由后台任务生成并按论文版本保存,登录后共享已有结果。

版本差异

目前只收录了一个版本。收录下一版后,可以对照标题、作者、分类和摘要。

观测到的版本

相邻记录可能跳过中间版本;首次发现 v2 及以上也会标为版本更新。

v1 · 2026-11-12 22:06 · 最新观测版本

Earlier citation practices are linked to signs of artificial intelligence use in scientific writing

As artificial intelligence (AI) becomes more common in scientific writing, some authors show fewer signs of AI assistance than expected across successive periods. We analysed OpenAlex publication histories for 71,133 authors with at least one eligible first-authored English-language publication each year from 2023 through September 2026. Using abstract-based writing scores, we defined resistance as the predicted minus observed share of abstracts classified as AI-assisted. Positive scores indicate fewer such abstracts than expected. Early resistance was positively associated with later resistance, although the share with positive scores fell. Environmental characteristics contributed more than individual characteristics to predicting later scores, although overall predictive power was low. Having a collaborator with a non-positive early score was associated with lower subsequent resistance. Authors with positive mean scores in both 2023-2024 and 2025-2026 cited older work, drew on fewer subfields and more often cited sources they had used before than authors with non-positive mean scores in both periods. These differences were evident before 2023. The adjusted gap in reference reuse rose from 3.24 percentage points before 2023 to 7.95 in 2025-2026. The findings link variation in signs of AI assistance to earlier differences in how scientists used prior work.

查看此版本解读 →查看此版本原文 ↗