Guest Post — AI as Reader, Author, and Reviewer: What Stays Human?
Today’s guest blogger shares highlights from a recent panel at the New Directions Seminar that concluded AI is simultaneously the largest challenge and the largest opportunity.
Today’s guest blogger shares highlights from a recent panel at the New Directions Seminar that concluded AI is simultaneously the largest challenge and the largest opportunity.
If libraries are civic institutions that structure society’s relationship to knowledge, and generative AI is poised to reshape discovery whether libraries act or not, will library leaders will develop strategies that preserve trust, equity, and sustainability?
Today’s guest bloggers share insights into the fragmented, tiring, and uncertain digital landscape for academics, and evidence that a shift is underway — with implications for scholarly communication that may be far-reaching.
For decades, EAL researchers have faced systemic disadvantages in publishing. AI writing tools promise relief, yet, they also bring new risks into science.
Nearly three years after ChatGPT’s debut, generative AI continues to reshape scholarly publishing. The sector has moved from experimentation toward integration, with advances in ethical writing tools, AI-driven discovery, summarization, and automated peer review. While workflows are becoming more efficient, the long-term impact on research creation and evaluation remains uncertain.
In the fast-moving world of AI research tools, there are many community-focused concerns that vendors should have strong opinions on and plans for, from privacy and security to sustainability and copyright. But the most misunderstood issue, in my view, is the one at the heart of it all — how AI will reshape the economics of academic research.
AI web harvesting bots are different from traditional web crawlers and violate many of the established rules and practices in place. Their rapidly expanding use is emerging as a significant IT management problem for content-rich websites across numerous industries.
We’re finally seeing a move to truly digital-first publishing systems and in today’s post Alice Meadows interviews Liz Ferguson of Wiley about this transition, including their own Research Exchange platform.
Today, we speak with Prof. Yana Suchikova about GAIDeT, the Generative AI Delegation Taxonomy, which enables researchers to disclose the use of generative AI in an honest and transparent way.
The future of peer review isn’t about choosing between humans and AI, or between speed and quality, but about combining the strengths of both to enable speed with quality, to ensure quality, ethics, and trust in the scholarly record.
To kick off Peer Review Week, we asked the Chefs, What’s a bold experiment with AI in peer review you’d like to see tested?
NISO’s Open Discovery Initiative (ODI) survey reflects the positive and negative expectations of generative AI in web-scale discovery tools.
This post explores author, reviewer, and publisher ethics and responsibilities related to the use of AI in coding and publishing research software.
Summing up the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Forum discussion on Emerging AI Dilemmas in Scholarly Publishing, which explored the many challenges AI presents for the scholarly community.
As AI becomes a major consumer of research, scholarly publishing must evolve: from PDFs for people to structured, high-quality data for machines.