OpenAlex · Aktualisierung stündlich · Letzte Aktualisierung: 20.05.2026, 03:05

Dies ist eine Übersichtsseite mit Metadaten zu dieser wissenschaftlichen Arbeit. Der vollständige Artikel ist beim Verlag verfügbar.

A Multidisciplinary Bibliometric Analysis of Differences and Commonalities Between GenAI in Science

2025·0 Zitationen·PublicationsOpen Access
Volltext beim Verlag öffnen

0

Zitationen

2

Autoren

2025

Jahr

Abstract

Generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) is rapidly permeating research practices, yet knowledge about its use and topical profile remains fragmented across tools and disciplines. In this study, we present a cross-disciplinary map of GenAI research based on the Web of Science Core Collection (as of 4 November 2025) for the ten tool lines with the largest number of publications. We employed a transparent query protocol in the Title (TI) and Topic (TS) fields, using Boolean and proximity operators together with brand-specific exclusion lists. Thematic similarity was estimated with the Jaccard index for the Top–50, Top–100, and Top–200 sets. In parallel, we computed volume and citation metrics using Python and reconstructed a country-level co-authorship network. The corpus comprises 14,418 deduplicated publications. A strong concentration is evident around ChatGPT, which accounts for approximately 80.6% of the total. The year 2025 shows a marked increase in output across all lines. The Jaccard matrices reveal two stable clusters: general-purpose tools (ChatGPT, Gemini, Claude, Copilot) and open-source/developer-led lines (LLaMA, Mistral, Qwen, DeepSeek). Perplexity serves as a bridge between the clusters, while Grok remains the most distinct. The co-authorship network exhibits a dual-core structure anchored in the United States and China. The study contributes to bibliometric research on GenAI by presenting a perspective that combines publication dynamics, citation structures, thematic profiles, and similarity matrices based on the Jaccard algorithm for different tool lines. In practice, it proposes a comparative framework that can help researchers and institutions match GenAI tools to disciplinary contexts and develop transparent, repeatable assessments of their use in scientific activities.

Ähnliche Arbeiten

Autoren

Institutionen

Themen

Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and EducationScientific Computing and Data ManagementMachine Learning in Materials Science
Volltext beim Verlag öffnen