engineering3 papersavg year 2026weak evidence

The study identifies a gap in the existing literature regarding the critical examination

Research gap analysis derived from 3 engineering papers in our local library.

The gap

The study identifies a gap in the existing literature regarding the critical examination of the role of generative AI in the scientific research process. The analysis highlights the need for a more nuanced understanding of the applications,

Evidence profile

Sourced from the stated research gap and future-work section of the source papers, classified as general, spanning 3 journals.

Research trend

Established — well-defined area with open sub-problems.

Supporting evidence — 3 representative gaps

  • Generative artificial intelligence and the transformation of the scientific research process through a critical review of the research cycle (2026) · Iberoamerican Journal of Science Measurement and Communication · doi

    The study identifies a gap in the existing literature regarding the critical examination of the role of generative AI in the scientific research process. The analysis highlights the need for a more nuanced understanding of the applications, benefits, and limitations of generative AI in the research process.

    generalstated research gap
    Keywords: study identifies gap existing literature regarding critical examination
  • From the click race to the citation game: a conceptual exploration of the shift from search engine optimisation to generative engine optimisation (2026) · Information Research an international electronic journal · doi

    The study suggests that future research should focus on empirical studies of generative search, information authority, and information practices shaped by artificial intelligence. The study highlights the need for further research on the implications of generative engine optimisation for content producers and information seekers.

    generalfuture-work sectionevidence 5/5
    Keywords: study suggests future research focus empirical studies generative
  • Exploring the Impact of Generative AI on Public Engagement and Information Dynamics (2026) · Media and Communication · doi

    There is a gap in research on generative AI, with existing studies often focusing on single systems and being largely situated in Western or Global North contexts. Empirical work frequently examines perceptions or short-term evaluations rather than everyday usage practices, motivations, and longer-term consequences for information behavior.

    generalstated research gapevidence 5/5
    Keywords: there gap research generative existing studies often focusing

Questions about this gap

The study identifies a gap in the existing literature regarding the critical examination of the role of generative AI in the scientific research process. The analysis highlights th… This is supported by 3 representative gap statements extracted from 3 papers, rated weak evidence.

Explore this gap further

Run this gap as a query across open scholarly engines for the latest related literature.

Working on this gap? Review it with us.

Science AI Journal reviews manuscripts in one pass with 8 specialised AI agents calibrated on 69,000+ real peer reviews.

Related gaps in Engineering

Command palette

Jump anywhere, run any action.