SciSciGPT: advancing human–AI collaboration in the science of science
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We introduce SciSciGPT, an open-source, prototype artificial intelligence (AI) collaborator that uses the domain of science of science as a testbed to explore the potential of large language model-powered research tools. SciSciGPT automates complex workflows, supports diverse analytical approaches, accelerates research prototyping and iteration and facilitates reproducibility. Through case studies, we demonstrate its ability to streamline a wide range of empirical and analytical research tasks while highlighting its broader potential to advance research. We further propose a large language model agent capability maturity model for human-AI collaboration, envisioning a roadmap to further improve and expand upon frameworks such as SciSciGPT. As AI capabilities continue to evolve, frameworks such as SciSciGPT may play increasingly pivotal roles in scientific research and discovery. At the same time, these new advances also raise critical challenges, from ensuring transparency and ethical use to balancing human and AI contributions. Addressing these issues may shape the future of scientific inquiry and inform how we train the next generation of scientists to thrive in an increasingly AI-integrated research ecosystem.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.050 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.057 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.008 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it