‘Two Sides of the Same Coin’: A Multi‐Stakeholder Perspective on Discoverability and Promotionality in a Comparison of Scholar‐Authored vs. AI ‐Generated Keywords From the Chinese Social Sciences

ABSTRACT For scholarly publishers, Generative AI presents efficiency opportunities but critical metadata quality challenges. To determine if AI can replace authors, we conducted a multi‐dimensional comparative analysis of 1500 paired scholar‐authored and Large Language Model (LLM)‐generated keyword sets from high‐impact Chinese social science articles, assessing grammatical, semantic and discourse features. Supported by rigorous statistical testing, we found the two approaches represent ‘two sides of the same coin’. The AI employed a bottom‐up ‘intelligent summarization’ logic, creating comprehensive sets optimised for discoverability. Conversely, human scholars used a top‐down ‘artisanal distillation’ logic to serve promotionality by crafting conceptually novel terms. Our findings demonstrate that full automation is suboptimal, sacrificing the crucial promotional function that brands research and signals specific contributions. We conclude the ideal path is a synergistic human‐AI workflow. This critical curation model enhances metadata by creating keywords that are both comprehensive and conceptually potent.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Learned Publishing
Published
2026-09-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1002/leap.2098
Primary Topic
Computational and Text Analysis Methods
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

‘Two Sides of the Same Coin’: A Multi‐Stakeholder Perspective on Discoverability and Promotionality in a Comparison of Scholar‐Authored vs. AI ‐Generated Keywords From the Chinese Social Sciences

Chenghui Wu, Yang Zhang, Hanlin Xu
Learned Publishing
Computational and Text Analysis Methods
article

‘Two Sides of the Same Coin’: A Multi‐Stakeholder Perspective on Discoverability and Promotionality in a Comparison of Scholar‐Authored vs. AI ‐Generated Keywords From the Chinese Social Sciences

Chenghui Wu, Yang Zhang, Hanlin Xu
article en

Abstract

ABSTRACT For scholarly publishers, Generative AI presents efficiency opportunities but critical metadata quality challenges. To determine if AI can replace authors, we conducted a multi‐dimensional comparative analysis of 1500 paired scholar‐authored and Large Language Model (LLM)‐generated keyword sets from high‐impact Chinese social science articles, assessing grammatical, semantic and discourse features. Supported by rigorous statistical testing, we found the two approaches represent ‘two sides of the same coin’. The AI employed a bottom‐up ‘intelligent summarization’ logic, creating comprehensive sets optimised for discoverability. Conversely, human scholars used a top‐down ‘artisanal distillation’ logic to serve promotionality by crafting conceptually novel terms. Our findings demonstrate that full automation is suboptimal, sacrificing the crucial promotional function that brands research and signals specific contributions. We conclude the ideal path is a synergistic human‐AI workflow. This critical curation model enhances metadata by creating keywords that are both comprehensive and conceptually potent.

Learned PublishingVol. 39(4)
University of Electronic Science and Technology of China (CN), Peking University (CN), University of Science and Technology Beijing (CN)
Nanjing University
Openalex Percentile: Top 3%
Computational and Text Analysis Methods
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.