About: PNAS nexus is an academic journal published by Oxford University Press. The journal publishes majorly in the area(s): Medicine & Biology. It has an ISSN identifier of 2752-6542. Over the lifetime, 469 publications have been published receiving 767 citations. The journal is also known as: Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences nexus.
TL;DR: Text-to-image generative AI significantly enhances human creative productivity and increases artwork value. It expands the idea space but makes it less efficient, and reduces visual novelty. AI adoption decreases value capture concentration among adopters.
Abstract: Abstract Recent artificial intelligence (AI) tools have demonstrated the ability to produce outputs traditionally considered creative. One such system is text-to-image generative AI (e.g. Midjourney, Stable Diffusion, DALL-E), which automates humans’ artistic execution to generate digital artworks. Utilizing a dataset of over 4 million artworks from more than 50,000 unique users, our research shows that over time, text-to-image AI significantly enhances human creative productivity by 25% and increases the value as measured by the likelihood of receiving a favorite per view by 50%. While peak artwork Content Novelty, defined as focal subject matter and relations, increases over time, average Content Novelty declines, suggesting an expanding but inefficient idea space. Additionally, there is a consistent reduction in both peak and average Visual Novelty, captured by pixel-level stylistic elements. Importantly, AI-assisted artists who can successfully explore more novel ideas, regardless of their prior originality, may produce artworks that their peers evaluate more favorably. Lastly, AI adoption decreased value capture (favorites earned) concentration among adopters. The results suggest that ideation and filtering are likely necessary skills in the text-to-image process, thus giving rise to “generative synesthesia”—the harmonious blending of human exploration and AI exploitation to discover new creative workflows.
TL;DR: The authors found that following the accounts of US Republican politicians or hyper-partisan/low-quality news sites were associated with lower confidence in the COVID-19 vaccine, even when controlling for key demographics such as self-reported political ideology and education.
Abstract: Abstract Understanding how vaccine hesitancy relates to online behavior is crucial for addressing current and future disease outbreaks. We combined survey data measuring attitudes toward the COVID-19 vaccine with Twitter data in two studies (N1 = 464 Twitter users, N2 = 1,600 Twitter users) with preregistered hypotheses to examine how real-world social media behavior is associated with vaccine hesitancy in the United States (US) and the United Kingdom (UK). In Study 1, we found that following the accounts of US Republican politicians or hyper-partisan/low-quality news sites were associated with lower confidence in the COVID-19 vaccine—even when controlling for key demographics such as self-reported political ideology and education. US right-wing influencers (e.g. Candace Owens, Tucker Carlson) had followers with the lowest confidence in the vaccine. Network analysis revealed that participants who were low and high in vaccine confidence separated into two distinct communities (or “echo chambers”), and centrality in the more right-wing community was associated with vaccine hesitancy in the US, but not in the UK. In Study 2, we found that one's likelihood of not getting the vaccine was associated with retweeting and favoriting low-quality news websites on Twitter. Altogether, we show that vaccine hesitancy is associated with following, sharing, and interacting with low-quality information online, as well as centrality within a conservative-leaning online community in the US. These results illustrate the potential challenges of encouraging vaccine uptake in a polarized social media environment.
TL;DR: In this paper , the authors examined nearly 110,000 student records from six large, public, research-intensive universities in order to assess whether these introductory courses disproportionately weed out underrepresented minority (URM) students.
Abstract: Abstract Diversifying science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) requires a critical examination of institutional structures at every educational level. In higher education, performance in core introductory courses required for STEM degrees is strongly associated with degree completion. Leveraging a multi-institutional database, we examine nearly 110,000 student records from six large, public, research-intensive universities in order to assess whether these introductory courses disproportionately weed out underrepresented minority (URM) students. We find that the association between low performance in an introductory STEM class and failure to obtain a STEM degree is stronger for URM students than for other students, even after controlling for academic preparation in high school and intent to obtain a STEM degree. To facilitate interpretation of our multivariate logistic regression model, and to highlight the dire situation in higher education, we also calculate predicted probabilities of STEM degree attainment for students of various demographics. The probability of obtaining a STEM degree for a STEM-intending white male student with average academic preparation who receives grades of C or better in all introductory courses is 48%. In contrast, for an otherwise similar URM female student, the probability is merely 35%. If these students receive less than a C in even one introductory STEM course, the probabilities drop to 33% and 21%, respectively.
TL;DR: In this article , the authors outline barriers and opportunities in the next generation of fire science and provide guidance for investment in future research and synthesize insights needed to better address the long-standing challenges of innovation across disciplines to promote coordinated research efforts; embrace different ways of knowing and knowledge generation; promote exploration of fundamental science; capitalize on the "firehose" of data for societal benefit; and integrate human and natural systems into models across multiple scales.
Abstract: Fire is an integral component of ecosystems globally and a tool that humans have harnessed for millennia. Altered fire regimes are a fundamental cause and consequence of global change, impacting people and the biophysical systems on which they depend. As part of the newly emerging Anthropocene, marked by human-caused climate change and radical changes to ecosystems, fire danger is increasing, and fires are having increasingly devastating impacts on human health, infrastructure, and ecosystem services. Increasing fire danger is a vexing problem that requires deep transdisciplinary, trans-sector, and inclusive partnerships to address. Here, we outline barriers and opportunities in the next generation of fire science and provide guidance for investment in future research. We synthesize insights needed to better address the long-standing challenges of innovation across disciplines to (i) promote coordinated research efforts; (ii) embrace different ways of knowing and knowledge generation; (iii) promote exploration of fundamental science; (iv) capitalize on the "firehose" of data for societal benefit; and (v) integrate human and natural systems into models across multiple scales. Fire science is thus at a critical transitional moment. We need to shift from observation and modeled representations of varying components of climate, people, vegetation, and fire to more integrative and predictive approaches that support pathways toward mitigating and adapting to our increasingly flammable world, including the utilization of fire for human safety and benefit. Only through overcoming institutional silos and accessing knowledge across diverse communities can we effectively undertake research that improves outcomes in our more fiery future.
TL;DR: The results suggest that inter-subject correlation is the result of similar cognitive processing of a shared stimulus and thus emerges only for those signals that exhibit a robust brain-body connection.
Abstract: Abstract Neural, physiological, and behavioral signals synchronize between human subjects in a variety of settings. Multiple hypotheses have been proposed to explain this interpersonal synchrony, but there is no clarity under which conditions it arises, for which signals, or whether there is a common underlying mechanism. We hypothesized that cognitive processing of a shared stimulus is the source of synchrony between subjects, measured here as intersubject correlation (ISC). To test this, we presented informative videos to participants in an attentive and distracted condition and subsequently measured information recall. ISC was observed for electro-encephalography, gaze position, pupil size, and heart rate, but not respiration and head movements. The strength of correlation was co-modulated in the different signals, changed with attentional state, and predicted subsequent recall of information presented in the videos. There was robust within-subject coupling between brain, heart, and eyes, but not respiration or head movements. The results suggest that ISC is the result of effective cognitive processing, and thus emerges only for those signals that exhibit a robust brain–body connection. While physiological and behavioral fluctuations may be driven by multiple features of the stimulus, correlation with other individuals is co-modulated by the level of attentional engagement with the stimulus.