MIT says that due to concerns about the “integrity” of a high -profile document on the impact of artificial intelligence on research and innovation, the document should be “withdrawn from public discourse”.
This document, “Artificial Intelligence, Scientific Discovery and Product Innovation”, was written by a doctorate in the University’s Economics Program. He claimed that he showed that the introduction of an AI tool into a scientific science laboratory of large but single materials led to the discovery of more materials and more patents, but by reducing the satisfaction of researchers with their work.
Mit Economists Daron Acemoglu (recently won the Nobel Prize) and David Autor praised the paper last year, with Autor that says in Wall Street Journal magazine Was “floor”. To a statement included in MIT’s announcement On Friday, Acemoglu and Autor described the document as “already known and discussed extensively in the literature on AI and science, although it has not been published in any magazine”.
However, the two economists have said that now they have “no confidence in the origin, credibility or validity of the data and in the sincerity of research”.
According to WSJA computer scientist with experience in material science approached Acemoglu and Autor with concerns in January. They brought these concerns to MIT, leading to an internal review.
MIT says that because of the laws for protecting the privacy of students, it cannot disclose the results of this review, but the author of the document is “no longer in MIT”. And while the university’s announcement does not name the writer, both A PPRINT version of paper And the original type coverage recognizes him as Aidan Toner-Rodgers. (TechCrunch has reached bureaucracy for comments.)
MIT also reports that it has requested to retire from the quarterly Economics magazine, where it was also published for publication from the Preprint Arxiv website. Obviously, only the authors of a document are supposed to submit arxiv withdrawal requests, but MIT says “to date, the author has not done so”.
