Academic collaboration on large language model studies increases overall but varies across disciplines

Lingyao Li, Ly Dinh, Songhua Hu, Libby Hemphill
{"title":"Academic collaboration on large language model studies increases overall but varies across disciplines","authors":"Lingyao Li, Ly Dinh, Songhua Hu, Libby Hemphill","doi":"arxiv-2408.04163","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Interdisciplinary collaboration is crucial for addressing complex scientific\nchallenges. Recent advancements in large language models (LLMs) have shown\nsignificant potential in benefiting researchers across various fields. To\nexplore the application of LLMs in scientific disciplines and their\nimplications for interdisciplinary collaboration, we collect and analyze 50,391\npapers from OpenAlex, an open-source platform for scholarly metadata. We first\nemploy Shannon entropy to assess the diversity of collaboration in terms of\nauthors' institutions and departments. Our results reveal that most fields have\nexhibited varying degrees of increased entropy following the release of\nChatGPT, with Computer Science displaying a consistent increase. Other fields\nsuch as Social Science, Decision Science, Psychology, Engineering, Health\nProfessions, and Business, Management & Accounting have shown minor to\nsignificant increases in entropy in 2024 compared to 2023. Statistical testing\nfurther indicates that the entropy in Computer Science, Decision Science, and\nEngineering is significantly lower than that in health-related fields like\nMedicine and Biochemistry, Genetics & Molecular Biology. In addition, our\nnetwork analysis based on authors' affiliation information highlights the\nprominence of Computer Science, Medicine, and other Computer Science-related\ndepartments in LLM research. Regarding authors' institutions, our analysis\nreveals that entities such as Stanford University, Harvard University,\nUniversity College London, and Google are key players, either dominating\ncentrality measures or playing crucial roles in connecting research networks.\nOverall, this study provides valuable insights into the current landscape and\nevolving dynamics of collaboration networks in LLM research.","PeriodicalId":501032,"journal":{"name":"arXiv - CS - Social and Information Networks","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"arXiv - CS - Social and Information Networks","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/arxiv-2408.04163","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Interdisciplinary collaboration is crucial for addressing complex scientific challenges. Recent advancements in large language models (LLMs) have shown significant potential in benefiting researchers across various fields. To explore the application of LLMs in scientific disciplines and their implications for interdisciplinary collaboration, we collect and analyze 50,391 papers from OpenAlex, an open-source platform for scholarly metadata. We first employ Shannon entropy to assess the diversity of collaboration in terms of authors' institutions and departments. Our results reveal that most fields have exhibited varying degrees of increased entropy following the release of ChatGPT, with Computer Science displaying a consistent increase. Other fields such as Social Science, Decision Science, Psychology, Engineering, Health Professions, and Business, Management & Accounting have shown minor to significant increases in entropy in 2024 compared to 2023. Statistical testing further indicates that the entropy in Computer Science, Decision Science, and Engineering is significantly lower than that in health-related fields like Medicine and Biochemistry, Genetics & Molecular Biology. In addition, our network analysis based on authors' affiliation information highlights the prominence of Computer Science, Medicine, and other Computer Science-related departments in LLM research. Regarding authors' institutions, our analysis reveals that entities such as Stanford University, Harvard University, University College London, and Google are key players, either dominating centrality measures or playing crucial roles in connecting research networks. Overall, this study provides valuable insights into the current landscape and evolving dynamics of collaboration networks in LLM research.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
大型语言模型研究的学术合作总体上有所增加,但各学科之间存在差异
跨学科合作对于解决复杂的科学挑战至关重要。最近在大型语言模型(LLM)方面取得的进展显示出了巨大的潜力,使各个领域的研究人员受益匪浅。为了探索 LLM 在科学学科中的应用及其对跨学科合作的影响,我们从学术元数据开源平台 OpenAlex 收集并分析了 50,391 篇论文。我们首先使用香农熵从作者所在机构和院系的角度评估了合作的多样性。我们的结果表明,在 ChatGPT 发布后,大多数领域的熵值都有不同程度的增加,其中计算机科学领域的熵值持续上升。其他领域,如社会科学、决策科学、心理学、工程学、健康专业以及商业、管理与会计,与 2023 年相比,2024 年的熵值都有轻微到显著的增加。统计测试进一步表明,计算机科学、决策科学和工程学领域的熵值明显低于医学和生物化学、遗传学与分子生物学等健康相关领域。此外,我们根据作者的隶属关系信息进行的网络分析突出表明,计算机科学、医学和其他计算机科学相关部门在法学硕士研究中占据主导地位。在作者所在机构方面,我们的分析表明,斯坦福大学、哈佛大学、伦敦大学学院和谷歌等机构都是关键参与者,它们要么在中心度量中占据主导地位,要么在连接研究网络方面发挥着关键作用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
My Views Do Not Reflect Those of My Employer: Differences in Behavior of Organizations' Official and Personal Social Media Accounts A novel DFS/BFS approach towards link prediction Community Shaping in the Digital Age: A Temporal Fusion Framework for Analyzing Discourse Fragmentation in Online Social Networks Skill matching at scale: freelancer-project alignment for efficient multilingual candidate retrieval "It Might be Technically Impressive, But It's Practically Useless to Us": Practices, Challenges, and Opportunities for Cross-Functional Collaboration around AI within the News Industry
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1