Will AI scoop your science? Some researchers see a gloomy future - Nature

Email Bluesky Facebook LinkedIn Reddit Whatsapp X Save article View saved research As AI agents’ scientific prowess grows, some scientists worry about getting scooped not just by human rivals, but also by bots. Credit: Getty As AI agents’ ability to do science autonomously continues to improve, scientists are facing a once-unthinkable question: will I get scooped by a bot ? At least twice in the past five weeks, researchers have said that they had been working for an extended period on a particular research question, only to learn that artificial-intelligence companies had either answered the question before them or announced results before they were ready to do the same. In response, researchers who are worried that AI tools might scrape their unpublished work and scoop them are limiting their use of such tools. Anthropic’s AI biolab finds ‘CRISPR-like’ DNA in viruses. What’s next? Nevertheless, some AI researchers, although not all, say that AI agents are increasingly likely to reach conclusions before scientists can do so. Researchers are “going to be scooped, but not because they’ve uploaded a manuscript”, says Geoffrey Irving, chief scientist at Resolution, an AI-safety research organization in Berkeley, California. “They’re going to get scooped because the AIs are very good at solving problems, and they’re going to get better and better.” Controversial findings On 7 September, Tristan Buckmaster, a mathematician at New York University in New York City, posted online that he and a collaborator had made progress on the Navier–Stokes problem, a long-standing open question in fluid dynamics . According to Buckmaster’s account , he and Levent Alpöge, a mathematician at the AI company Anthropic, based in San Francisco, California, whose work with Buckmaster was a personal project, had been pursuing the problem for a year. Buckmaster’s 7 September post also included a paper with the solution to a simpler version of the problem. The next day, 8 September, OpenAI, also in San Francisco, announced that its agents had solved the puzzle — a timing that Buckmaster has publicly questioned. Who gets credit in the AI era? OpenAI maths bombshell sparks debate Buckmaster raised the possibility that information that he and Alpöge had uploaded to an OpenAI tool could have been used to train the company’s models. OpenAI disputed this scenario. The company said in a statement that an investigation had confirmed that Buckmaster’s “prompts” in the two months before the 8 September announcement “could not have influenced the system in any way, including through training”. The statement also said that OpenAI’s researchers and agents “did not see any of their [Buckmaster and Alpöge’s] work through any means until they released it publicly”. Two weeks later, Anthropic announced that agents running on its Claude large language model (LLM) had discovered that certain viruses have a pattern of repeated DNA segments similar to the pattern seen in CRISPR gene-editing systems . After the announcement, Mario Rodríguez Mestre, a PhD student in computational biology at the University of Copenhagen, told The New York Times that he has been studying the same DNA patterns for several years , often using Claude, but has not published the work. Mestre also raised the possibility that information his team had uploaded to Anthropic’s tools could have been incorporated into Claude’s training data. Anthropic told the Times that its model was “not trained on any user transcripts”. Lack of trust Despite these reassurances, some scientists are now re-evaluating how they use AI. Sandra Laurentino, a reproductive epigeneticist at the University of Münster in Germany, says she no longer trusts AI systems. She now uses AI only to check why her code fails, and before doing so changes all of the parameter and variable names to generic labels such as “group A has feature X” to avoid giving the system information about her experiments. “I am quite careful when it comes to AI,” she says, but the recent controversy has “made me even more paranoid”. The AI discoveries have also made Samuel Mehr, an auditory cognitive scientist at the University of Auckland in New Zealand, even more hesitant to use commercial AI models than he already was. He has created an AI-use policy for his laboratory that forbids students from uploading protected information to commercial LLMs and warns against using the models for any part of the research process. “I think it’s incredibly risky to hand out your intellectual property to third parties when you don’t know what they’re going to do with it,” he says. Enjoying our latest content? Log in or create an account to continue Access the most recent journalism from Nature's award-winning team Explore the latest features & opinion covering groundbreaking research Access through your institution or Sign in or create an account Continue with Google Continue with ORCiD doi: https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-026-03128-6 Reprints and permissions Related Articles Who gets credit in the AI era? OpenAI maths bombshell sparks debate AI cracks 80-year-old mathematics challenge — researchers are astonished OpenAI claims huge maths breakthrough on a famed ‘Millennium Problem’ Meet the academics refusing to use generative AI AI companies must work with the research community to protect attribution Subjects Machine learning Computer science Lab life Latest on: Machine learning Computer science Lab life Retrofitted LLM can count the letter ‘i’s in ‘artificial intelligence’ News & Views 07 OCT 26 The science of superintelligence and why AI is still a useful word News Explainer 07 OCT 26 OpenAI posts 700 maths preprints online: mathematicians are up in arms News 07 OCT 26 The science of superintelligence and why AI is still a useful word News Explainer 07 OCT 26 Retrofitting language models to operate over bytes Article 07 OCT 26 ‘Vibe coding’ makes the dictionary: AI terms recognized by Merriam-Webster News 01 OCT 26 How we ditched presentations and embraced silence in our lab meetings Career Column 07 OCT 26 Can we have class outside? Seven tips to breeze through outdoor lectures Career Feature 02 OCT 26 Chemists struggle to ditch hazardous solvents — even after decades of ‘green’ efforts News 25 SEP 26 Jobs Scientific Program Director (PhD) - Genetics & Genomics Research The Scientific Program Director provides high-level scientific, regulatory, and operational leadership in support of science research programs. New York City, New York (US) Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai - Genetics and Genomic Sciences Faculty Positions at the Center for Machine Learning Research (CMLR), Peking University CMLR's goal is to advance machine learning-related research across a wide range of disciplines. Beijing (CN) Center for Machine Learning Research (CMLR), Peking University Assistant or Associate Professor of Cell Biology Department of Cell Biology at the University of Virginia School of Medicine invites applications for Assistant or Associate Professor of Cell Biology Charlottesville, Virginia University of Virginia Recruitment Announcement for High-Level Talent at the Center for Agricultural Microbiology Join HZAU's global faculty team to advance research with competitive benefits. Wuhan, Hubei (CN) Huazhong Agricultural University (HZAU) Open-Rank Faculty Position in Theoretical Biology The Department of Biological Sciences seeks an outstanding individual for an open-rank faculty position in Theoretical Biology. Nashville, Tennessee Vanderbilt University Department of Biological Sciences