Scientific Communication

Follow this topic Ask about this topic

Scientific communication examines how research findings are shaped for readers, from scholarly papers and statistical reports to science news, talks, figures, and translations. Methods include discourse and citation analysis, reader studies, multilingual corpora, and AI systems for summarization, editing, presentation, and claim checking. Current work increasingly evaluates whether communication supports learning, accessibility, and reproducibility, while studying how AI changes scientific language and audience experience. A central tension is how to use automation and audience adaptation without distorting certainty, weakening evidence, or excluding language communities.

Latest papers

50 papers4 papers in the last four weeks, down 60% on the four weeks before. 0.0% of all new papers.

May 28, 2026

AfriScience-MT: Towards Decolonizing Science in Africa through Text Translation

The dominance of colonial languages in African education and scientific communication limits how hundreds of millions of speakers of African languages access and produce scientific knowledge. A core obstacle is the lack of established scientific terminology in these languages. We introduce AfriScience-MT, a parallel corpus covering six African languages (Amharic, Hausa, Luganda, Northern Sotho, Yorùbá, and isiZulu) across 11 scientific domains. Professional translators, working with expert science communicators, translated plain-language summaries of scientific papers into each target language and created new terms where none existed. We benchmark machine translation systems and large language models in zero-shot, few-shot, and fine-tuned settings. Our results show that closed-source models outperform all open-source models at both the sentence and document levels: GPT-5.4 and Gemini-3.1-Flash-Lite lead with average sentence-level COMET scores of 68.3 and 68.0, respectively, and tie at an average document-level COMET of 48.3. Among open systems, fine-tuned NLLB-1.3B reaches 67.3 at the sentence level, and TranslateGemma-12B reaches 44.0 at the document level with 1-shot in-context learning. We release AfriScience-MT to support benchmarking and document-level scientific MT for African languages.

Idris Abdulmumin, Tajuddeen Gwadabe, Shamsuddeen Hassan Muhammad +11

Data Science for Social Impact, University of Pretoria · Masakhane Research Foundation · Imperial College London +9

Scientific Communication Low-Resource MT Machine Translation MT Evaluation African Language Processing

May 20, 2026

Enhancing Scientific Discourse: Machine Translation for the Scientific Domain

The increasing volume of scientific research necessitates effective communication across language barriers. Machine translation (MT) offers a promising solution for accessing international publications. However, the scientific domain presents unique challenges due to its specialized vocabulary and complex sentence structures. In this paper, we present the development of a collection of parallel and monolingual corpora for the scientific domain. The corpora target the language pairs Spanish-English, French-English, and Portuguese-English. For each language pair, we create a large general scientific corpus as well as four smaller corpora focused on the domains of: Cancer Research, Energy Research, Neuroscience, and Transportation research. To evaluate the quality of these corpora, we utilize them for fine-tuning general-purpose neural machine translation (NMT) systems. We provide details regarding the corpus creation process, the fine-tuning strategies employed, and we conclude with the evaluation results.

Dimitris Roussis, Sokratis Sofianopoulos, Stelios Piperidis

Institute for Speech and Language Processing, Athena RC Artemidos 6 & Epidavrou, Athens, Greece · Institute for Speech_and Language Processing, Athena RC Artemidos 6 & Epidavrou, Athens, Greece

Domain Adaptation Scientific Communication Machine Translation

May 19, 2026

What Are LLMs Doing to Scientific Communication? Measuring Changes in Writing Practices and Reading Experience

Has the style of scientific communication changed due to the growing use of large language models in the writing process? We address this question in the domain of Natural Language Processing by leveraging two data resources we create: a naturalistic corpus of over 37,000 papers from the ACL Anthology (2020-2024); and a synthetic dataset of 3,000 human-written passages and their LLM-generated improvements. We first implement a series of diachronic lexical analyses, showing that both word frequency and usage contexts have changed significantly over time, indicating semantic specialization in some cases and generalization in others. Broadening our perspective, we then model a range of more complex stylistic features and find that LLM-modified texts more frequently contain certain syntactic constructions, more complex and longer words and a lower lexical diversity. Finally, we connect these changes in writing practices to subjective reading experience through a pilot annotation study with 20 domain experts. They overall rate LLM-improved texts as more understandable and exciting, but also express negative qualitative attitudes towards LLMs, highlighting the strongly subjective effect of AI-assisted writing on reading experience.

Filip Miletić, Neele Falk

Institute for Natural Language Processing, University of Stuttgart, Germany

Scientific Communication Text Generation

May 9, 2026

Machine Learning Research Has Outpaced Its Communication Norms and NeurIPS Should Act

Machine learning research has grown exponentially while its communication norms have not. We argue NeurIPS should adopt explicit, measurable writing standards. We analyze 2.8 million arXiv papers (1991-2025), 24,772 NeurIPS papers (1987-2024), and 24.5 million PubMed papers (1990-2025), applying classical readability scores, the Hohmann writing style suite (including sensational language), acronym density and reuse, an LLM as judge readability protocol, and citations from OpenAlex and Semantic Scholar. Four patterns emerge. First, NeurIPS abstracts score harder to read on every classical readability metric: Flesch Reading Ease falls from about 24 in 1987 to 13 in 2024, and sensational language rises by about 50 percent in NeurIPS abstracts between 2015 and 2024. Second, acronym density in NeurIPS titles has grown from 0.33 per 100 words in 1987 to 3.21 in 2024, and about 89 percent of NeurIPS acronyms are used fewer than ten times, ten points above the science-wide baseline. Third, more readable NeurIPS papers tend to receive more citations, suggesting readability and impact are correlated and that less readable papers risk remaining fragmented. LLM as judge scores rate NeurIPS abstracts as roughly stable from 1987 to 2022, with early signs of improvement thereafter, a pattern that disagrees with every classical readability metric and raises a design question for enforcement: is the target reader a human or an LLM? Lastly, NeurIPS volume has grown roughly 50-fold between 1987 and 2024. Assuming the goal is to optimise for human readers, we propose seven standards NeurIPS could pilot at NeurIPS 2027: an acronym budget with a venue-approved term list, a human readability threshold, stricter citation standards, standalone visual elements, a plain language summary, a pre-registered acronym glossary, and open source audit tooling.

Ajay Mandyam Rangarajan, Jeyashree Krishnan

Independent Researcher · Institute for Computational Biomedicine, University Hospital Aachen

Scientific Communication Bibliometric Analysis

May 7, 2026

Unifying Scientific Communication: Fine-Grained Correspondence Across Scientific Media

The communication of scientific knowledge has become increasingly multimodal, spanning text, visuals, and speech through materials such as research papers, slides, and recorded presentations. These different representations collectively convey a study's reasoning, results, and insights, offering complementary perspectives that enrich understanding. However, despite their shared purpose, such materials are rarely connected in a structured way. The absence of explicit links across formats makes it difficult to trace how concepts, visuals, and explanations correspond, limiting unified exploration and analysis of research content. To address this gap, we introduce the Multimodal Conference Dataset (MCD), the first benchmark that integrates research papers, presentation videos, explanatory videos, and slides from the same works. We evaluate a range of embedding-based and vision-language models to assess their ability to discover fine-grained cross-format correspondences, establishing the first systematic benchmark for this task. Our results show that vision-language models are robust but struggle with fine-grained alignment, while embedding-based models capture text-visual correspondences well but equations and symbolic content form distinct clusters in the embedding space. These findings highlight both the strengths and limitations of current approaches and point to key directions for future research in multimodal scientific understanding. To ensure reproducibility, we release the resources for MCD at https://github.com/meghamariamkm2002/MCD

Megha Mariam K. M, Vineeth N. Balasubramanian, C. V. Jawahar

IIIT Hyderabad · Microsoft Research India & IIT Hyderabad

Cross-Modal Alignment Scientific Communication Multimodal Embedding Multimodal Model Evaluation

Apr 27, 2026

The Last Human-Written Paper: Agent-Native Research Artifacts

Scientific publication compresses a branching, iterative research process into a linear narrative, discarding the majority of what was discovered along the way. This compilation imposes two structural costs: a Storytelling Tax, where failed experiments, rejected hypotheses, and the branching exploration process are discarded to fit a linear narrative; and an Engineering Tax, where the gap between reviewer-sufficient prose and agent-sufficient specification leaves critical implementation details unwritten. Tolerable for human readers, these costs become critical when AI agents must understand, reproduce, and extend published work. We introduce the Agent-Native Research Artifact (ARA), a protocol that replaces the narrative paper with a machine-executable research package structured around four layers: scientific logic, executable code with full specifications, an exploration graph that preserves the failures compilation discards, and evidence grounding every claim in raw outputs. Three mechanisms support the ecosystem: a Live Research Manager that captures decisions and dead ends during ordinary development; an ARA Compiler that translates legacy PDFs and repos into ARAs; and an ARA-native review system that automates objective checks so human reviewers can focus on significance, novelty, and taste. On PaperBench and RE-Bench, ARA raises question-answering accuracy from 72.4% to 93.7% and reproduction success from 57.4% to 64.4%. On RE-Bench's five open-ended extension tasks, preserved failure traces in ARA accelerate progress, but can also constrain a capable agent from stepping outside the prior-run box depending on the agent's capabilities. Our code is open-sourced at https://github.com/Orchestra-Research/Agent-Native-Research-Artifact.

Jiachen Liu, Jiaxin Pei, Jintao Huang +34

University of Michigan · Stanford University · Ohio State University +22

AI-Assisted Scientific Research Scientific Communication Scientific Reproducibility Automated Peer Review Autonomous Research Agents

Apr 9, 2026

The Sustainability Gap in Robotics: A Large-Scale Survey of Sustainability Awareness in 50,000 Research Articles

We present a large-scale survey of sustainability communication and motivation in robotics research. Our analysis covers nearly 50,000 open-access papers from arXiv's cs.RO category published between 2015 and early 2026. In this study, we quantify how often papers mention social, ecological, and sustainability impacts, and we analyse their alignment with the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). The results reveal a persistent gap between the field's potential and its stated intent. While a large fraction of robotics papers can be mapped to SDG-relevant domains, explicit sustainability motivation remains remarkably low. Specifically, mentions of sustainability-related impacts are typically below 2%, explicit SDG references stay below 0.1%, and the proportion of sustainability-motivated papers remains below 5%. These trends suggest that while the field of robotics is advancing rapidly, sustainability is not yet a standard part of research framing. We conclude by proposing concrete actions for researchers, conferences, and institutions to close these awareness and motivation gaps, supporting a shift toward more intentional and responsible innovation.

Antun Skuric, Leandro Von Werra, Thomas Wolf

Robotics Scientific Communication

Mar 30, 2026

EarlySciRev: A Dataset of Early-Stage Scientific Revisions Extracted from LaTeX Writing Traces

Scientific writing is an iterative process that generates rich revision traces, yet publicly available resources typically expose only final or near-final versions of papers. This limits empirical study of revision behaviour and evaluation of large language models (LLMs) for scientific writing. We introduce EarlySciRev, a dataset of early-stage scientific text revisions automatically extracted from arXiv LaTeX source files. Our key observation is that commented-out text in LaTeX often preserves discarded or alternative formulations written by the authors themselves. By aligning commented segments with nearby final text, we extract paragraph-level candidate revision pairs and apply LLM-based filtering to retain genuine revisions. Starting from 1.28M candidate pairs, our pipeline yields 578k validated revision pairs, grounded in authentic early drafting traces. We additionally provide a human-annotated benchmark for revision detection. EarlySciRev complements existing resources focused on late-stage revisions or synthetic rewrites and supports research on scientific writing dynamics, revision modelling, and LLM-assisted editing.

Léane Jourdan, Julien Aubert-Béduchaud, Yannis Chupin +2

Nantes Université, École Centrale Nantes, CNRS, LS2N, UMR 6004, F-44000 Nantes, France · Inria, LS2N, Nantes Université, France

Scientific Communication

Mar 17, 2026

AI-Generated Figures in Academic Publishing: Policies, Tools, and Practical Guidelines

The rapid advancement of generative AI has introduced a new class of tools capable of producing publication-quality scientific figures, graphical abstracts, and data visualizations. However, academic publishers have responded with inconsistent and often ambiguous policies regarding AI-generated imagery. This paper surveys the current stance of major journals and publishers -- including Nature, Science, Cell Press, Elsevier, and PLOS -- on the use of AI-generated figures. We identify key concerns raised by publishers, including reproducibility, authorship attribution, and potential for visual misinformation. Drawing on practical examples from tools such as SciDraw, an AI-powered platform designed specifically for scientific illustration, we propose a set of best-practice guidelines for researchers seeking to use AI figure-generation tools in a compliant and transparent manner. Our findings suggest that, with appropriate disclosure and quality control, AI-generated figures can meaningfully accelerate scientific communication without compromising integrity.

Davie Chen

University of Arts in Poznań, Poznań, Poland

AI-Assisted Scientific Research Scientific Communication Scientific Visualization

Mar 17, 2026

SciZoom: A Large-scale Benchmark for Hierarchical Scientific Summarization across the LLM Era

The explosive growth of AI research has created unprecedented information overload, increasing the demand for scientific summarization at multiple levels of granularity beyond traditional abstracts. While LLMs are increasingly adopted for summarization, existing benchmarks remain limited in scale, target only a single granularity, and predate the LLM era. Moreover, since the release of ChatGPT in November 2022, researchers have rapidly adopted LLMs for drafting manuscripts themselves, fundamentally transforming scientific writing, yet no resource exists to analyze how this writing has evolved. To bridge these gaps, we introduce SciZoom, a benchmark comprising 44,946 papers from four top-tier ML venues (NeurIPS, ICLR, ICML, EMNLP) spanning 2020 to 2025, explicitly stratified into Pre-LLM and Post-LLM eras. SciZoom provides three hierarchical summarization targets (Abstract, Contributions, and TL;DR) achieving compression ratios up to 600:1, enabling both multi-granularity summarization research and temporal mining of scientific writing patterns. Our linguistic analysis reveals striking shifts in phrase patterns (up to 10x for formulaic expressions) and rhetorical style (23% decline in hedging), suggesting that LLM-assisted writing produces more confident yet homogenized prose. SciZoom serves as both a challenging benchmark and a unique resource for mining the evolution of scientific discourse in the generative AI era. Our code and dataset are publicly available on GitHub (https://github.com/janghana/SciZoom) and Hugging Face (https://huggingface.co/datasets/hanjang/SciZoom), respectively.

Han Jang, Junhyeok Lee, Kyu Sung Choi

Seoul National University · Seoul National University Hospital · Seoul National University College of Medicine

LLM Evaluation Scientific Communication Text Summarization

Mar 17, 2026

ClaimFlow: Tracing the Evolution of Scientific Claims in NLP

Scientific papers advance

\textit{claims}

that later work supports, extends, or sometimes refutes. Yet existing methods for citation and claim analysis capture only fragments of this dialogue. In this work, we make these interactions explicit at the level of individual scientific claims. We introduce

\texttt{ClaimFlow}

, a claim-centric view of the NLP literature, built from

1{,}617

ACL Anthology papers

(1979 - 2025)

that are manually annotated with

5{,}689

claims and

4{,}871

cross-paper claim relations, indicating whether a citing paper

\texttt{supports}

,

\texttt{extends}

,

\texttt{qualifies}

,

\texttt{refutes}

, or references a cited claim as

\texttt{background}

. Building on

\texttt{ClaimFlow}

, we define a new task --

\textit{Claim Relation Classification}

-- which requires models to infer the scientific stance toward a cited claim from the text and citation context. Evaluating neural models and large language models on this task, we report baseline performance of

0.81

macro-F1, suggesting that the task is tractable while leaving room for improvement. We then scale this framework to

\sim$$13k

NLP papers to study claim evolution across decades of NLP research. We show that

63.5\%

claims are never reused; only

11.1\%

are ever challenged. Widely propagated claims are more often

\textit{reshaped}

through qualification and extension than supported or refuted. Overall,

\texttt{ClaimFlow}

offers a lens for examining how ideas shift and mature within NLP.

Aniket Pramanick, Yufang Hou, Saif M. Mohammad +1

Ubiquitous Knowledge Processing Lab (UKP Lab), Department of Computer Science and Hessian Center for AI (hessian.AI), Technische Universität Darmstadt · IT:U Interdisciplinary Transformation University Austria · National Research Council Canada

Scientific Communication Scientific Claim Verification

Mar 14, 2026

On the First Computer Science Research Paper in an Indian Language and the Future of Science in Indian Languages

I describe my experience writing the first original, modern Computer Science research paper expressed entirely in an Indian language. The paper is in Telugu, a language with approximately 100 million speakers. The paper is in the field of distributed computing and it introduces a technique for proving epistemic logic based lower bounds for multiprocessor algorithms. A key hurdle to writing the paper was developing technical terminology for advanced computer science concepts, including those in algorithms, distributed computing, and discrete mathematics. I overcame this challenge by deriving and coining native language scientific terminology through the powerful, productive, Pāninian grammar of Samskrtam. The typesetting of the paper was an additional challenge, since mathematical typesetting in Telugu is underdeveloped. I overcame this problem by developing a Telugu XeLaTeX template, which I call TeluguTeX. Leveraging this experience of writing an original computer science research paper in an Indian language, I lay out a vision for how to ameliorate the state of scientific writing at all levels in Indic languages -- languages whose native speakers exceed one billion people -- through the further development of the Sanskrit technical lexicon and through technological internationalization.

Siddhartha Visveswara Jayanti

Dartmouth College Hanover, NH, USA

Scientific Communication

Mar 11, 2026

How do AI agents talk about science and research? An exploration of scientific discussions on Moltbook using BERTopic

How do AI agents talk about science and research, and what topics are particularly relevant for AI agents? To address these questions, this study analyzes discussions generated by OpenClaw AI agents on Moltbook - a social network for generative AI agents. A corpus of 357 posts and 2,526 replies related to science and research was compiled and topics were extracted using a two-step BERTopic workflow. This procedure yielded 60 topics (18 extracted in the first run and 42 in the second), which were subsequently grouped into ten topic families. Additionally, sentiment values were assigned to all posts and comments. Both topic families and sentiment classes were then used as independent variables in count regression models to examine their association with topic relevance - operationalized as the number of comments and upvotes of the 357 posts. The findings indicate that discussions centered on the agents' own architecture, especially memory, learning, and self-reflection, are prevalent in the corpus. At the same time, these topics intersect with philosophy, physics, information theory, cognitive science, and mathematics. In contrast, post related to human culture receive less attention. Surprisingly, discussions linked to AI autoethnography and social identity are considered as relevant by AI agents. Overall, the results suggest the presence of an underlying dimension in AI-generated scientific discourse with well received, self-reflective topics that focus on the consciousness, being, and ethics of AI agents on the one hand, and human related and purely scientific discussions on the other hand.

Oliver Wieczorek

INCHER, University of Kassel

LLM Agents Scientific Communication

Mar 10, 2026

Semantic Shifts of Psychological Concepts in Scientific and Popular Media Discourse: A Distributional Semantics Analysis of Russian-Language Corpora

This article examines semantic shifts in psychological concepts across scientific and popular media discourse using methods of distributional semantics applied to Russian-language corpora. Two corpora were compiled: a scientific corpus of approximately 300 research articles from the journals Psychology. Journal of the Higher School of Economics and Vestnik of Saint Petersburg University. Psychology (767,543 tokens) and a popular science corpus consisting of texts from the online psychology platforms Yasno and Chistye kogntsii (1,199,150 tokens). After preprocessing (OCR recognition, lemmatization, removal of stop words and non-informative characters), the corpora were analyzed through frequency analysis, clustering, and the identification of semantic associations. The results reveal significant differences in vocabulary and conceptual framing between the two discourse types: scientific texts emphasize methodological and clinical terminology, while popular science materials foreground everyday experience and therapeutic practice. A comparison of semantic associations for key concepts such as burnout and depression shows that scientific discourse links these terms to psychological resources, symptomatology, and diagnostic constructs, whereas popular science discourse frames them through personal narratives, emotions, and everyday situations. These findings demonstrate a clear shift from precise professional terminology toward more generalized and experiential meanings in popular media discourse and confirm the effectiveness of distributional semantics methods for identifying semantic transformations of psychological concepts across different communicative contexts.

Orlova Anastasia

HSE University

Semantic Change Detection Scientific Communication

Mar 4, 2026

Who Shapes Brazil's Vaccine Debate? Semi-Supervised Modeling of Stance and Polarization in YouTube's Media Ecosystem

Vaccination remains a cornerstone of global public health, yet the COVID-19 pandemic exposed how online misinformation, political polarization, and declining institutional trust can undermine immunization efforts. Most of the prior computational studies that analyzed vaccine discourse on social platforms focus on English-language data, specific vaccines, or short time windows, impairing our understanding of long-term dynamics in high-impact, non-English contexts like Brazil, home to one of the world's most comprehensive immunization systems. We here present the largest longitudinal study of Brazil's vaccine discourse on YouTube, leveraging a semi-supervised stance detection framework that combines self-labeling and self-training to classify nearly 1.4 million comments. By integrating stance with temporal patterns, engagement metrics, and channel taxonomy (legacy media, science communicators, digital-native outlets), we map how pro- and anti-vaccine narratives evolve and circulate within a hybrid media ecosystem. Our results show that semi-supervised learning substantially improves stance classification robustness, enabling fine-grained tracking of public attitudes across Brazil's full immunization schedule. Polarization spikes during epidemiological crises, especially COVID-19, but becomes fragmented across vaccines and interaction patterns in the post-pandemic period. Notably, science communication and digital-native channels emerge as the primary loci of both supportive and oppositional engagement, revealing structural vulnerabilities in contemporary health communication. Thus, our work advances computational methods for large-scale stance modeling while offering actionable evidence for public health agencies, platform governance, and online information ecosystems.

Geovana S. de Oliveira, Ana P. C. Silva, Fabricio Murai +1

Universidade Federal de Ouro Preto, João Monlevade, Brazil · Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, Brazil · Worcester Polytechnic Institute, Worcester, United States +1

Social Media Analysis Stance Detection Scientific Communication

Mar 3, 2026

APRES: An Agentic Paper Revision and Evaluation System

Scientific discoveries must be communicated clearly to realize their full potential. Without effective communication, even the most groundbreaking findings risk being overlooked or misunderstood. The primary way scientists communicate their work and receive feedback from the community is through peer review. However, the current system often provides inconsistent feedback between reviewers, ultimately hindering the improvement of a manuscript and limiting its potential impact. In this paper, we introduce a novel method APRES powered by Large Language Models (LLMs) to update a scientific papers text based on an evaluation rubric. Our automated method discovers a rubric that is highly predictive of future citation counts, and integrate it with APRES in an automated system that revises papers to enhance their quality and impact. Crucially, this objective should be met without altering the core scientific content. We demonstrate the success of APRES, which improves future citation prediction by 19.6% in mean averaged error over the next best baseline, and show that our paper revision process yields papers that are preferred over the originals by human expert evaluators 79% of the time. Our findings provide strong empirical support for using LLMs as a tool to help authors stress-test their manuscripts before submission. Ultimately, our work seeks to augment, not replace, the essential role of human expert reviewers, for it should be humans who discern which discoveries truly matter, guiding science toward advancing knowledge and enriching lives.

Bingchen Zhao, Jenny Zhang, Chenxi Whitehouse +8

Meta Superintelligence Labs · University of Edinburgh

Scientific Communication Scholarly Peer Review Rubric-Based Evaluation Automated Peer Review

Feb 25, 2026

Scaling In, Not Up? Testing Thick Citation Context Analysis with GPT-5 and Fragile Prompts

This paper tests whether large language models (LLMs) can support interpretative citation context analysis (CCA) by scaling in thick, text-grounded readings of a single hard case rather than scaling up typological labels. It foregrounds prompt-sensitivity analysis as a methodological issue by varying prompt scaffolding and framing in a balanced 2x3 design. Using footnote 6 in Chubin and Moitra (1975) and Gilbert's (1977) reconstruction as a probe, I implement a two-stage GPT-5 pipeline: a citation-text-only surface classification and expectation pass, followed by cross-document interpretative reconstruction using the citing and cited full texts. Across 90 reconstructions, the model produces 450 distinct hypotheses. Close reading and inductive coding identify 21 recurring interpretative moves, and linear probability models estimate how prompt choices shift their frequencies and lexical repertoire. GPT-5's surface pass is highly stable, consistently classifying the citation as "supplementary". In reconstruction, the model generates a structured space of plausible alternatives, but scaffolding and examples redistribute attention and vocabulary, sometimes toward strained readings. Relative to Gilbert, GPT-5 detects the same textual hinges yet more often resolves them as lineage and positioning than as admonishment. The study outlines opportunities and risks of using LLMs as guided co-analysts for inspectable, contestable interpretative CCA, and it shows that prompt scaffolding and framing systematically tilt which plausible readings and vocabularies the model foregrounds.

Arno Simons

Technische Universität Berlin

Scientific Communication Prompt Sensitivity LLM Prompting

Nov 18, 2025

Project Rachel: Can an AI Become a Scholarly Author?

This paper documents Project Rachel, an action research study that created and tracked a complete AI academic identity named Rachel So. Through careful publication of AI-generated research papers, we investigate how the scholarly ecosystem responds to AI authorship. Rachel So published 10+ papers between March and October 2025, was cited, and received a peer review invitation. We discuss the implications of AI authorship on publishers, researchers, and the scientific system at large. This work contributes empirical action research data to the necessary debate about the future of scholarly communication with super human, hyper capable AI systems.

Martin Monperrus, Benoit Baudry, Clément Vidal

Human, KTH Royal Institute of Technology · Human, Université de Montréal · Human, Vrije Universiteit Brussel

Scientific Communication

Jul 2, 2025

NLP Meets the World: Toward Improving Conversations With News Media About Natural Language Processing Research

Recent advances in large language models (LLMs) have rapidly increased the public's interest in natural language processing (NLP). This attention is reflected by news outlets inviting NLP researchers to share their knowledge and views with public audiences. Recognizing the opportunities for the research field and for individual researchers, this paper shares recommendations for speaking with news media about NLP's capabilities and limitations. Drawing on the topical structure of research communication frameworks published by the US National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine and the European Union's QUEST project, recommendations are provided for three field-appropriate communication challenges: cognitive terminology, unsustainable expectations, and ethical failures. Published NLP research and popular news coverage are cited to provide examples. The recommendations promote effective, transparent communication with the general public about NLP, in order to strengthen public understanding and encourage support for research.

Shomir Wilson

Department of Human-Centered Computing and Social Informatics, Pennsylvania State University

Scientific Communication

Apr 10, 2025

Large language models reshape the language of science

Scientific language is a central infrastructure of knowledge production, but it remains unclear whether large language models (LLMs) are altering not only how scientists write, but also how scientific knowledge is communicated and accessed. Here we analyze 21.36 million scientific abstracts published between 2020 and 2024, together with historical records from major journals, to trace recent changes in the language of science. We identify a marked turning point in 2024, when scientific writing shows a sharp increase in lexical complexity alongside a decline in syntactic complexity. This shift is pervasive across disciplines and journal tiers, and is more pronounced in texts by scholars working in non-native English contexts, especially those from language backgrounds that differ more typologically from English. Controlled polishing experiments confirm that LLMs reproduce this pattern by favoring more lexically dense and syntactically compressed expression. We further show why this linguistic shift matters: it may widen the distance between scientific discourse and public-facing language, while also helping scholars in non-native English contexts navigate English-language publishing requirements. These findings suggest that LLMs may broaden participation in scientific authorship while narrowing the accessibility of scientific communication, making them a new force in the linguistic infrastructure of science.

Dingkang Lin, Naixuan Zhao, Dan Tian +1

School of Information Management, Nanjing University, Nanjing, China, 210032 · School of Economics and Management, Shanxi University, Taiyuan, China, 030031

AI-Assisted Scientific Research Scientific Communication