Chatbots and Scholarly Databases

Impressions from Trying Out Scopus AI

Authors

  • Leticia Antunes Nogueira Norwegian University of Science and Techology

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.5860/ital.v44i1.17116

Keywords:

artificial intelligence, AI-generated content tools, Scopus, academic libraries, library search, information searching, information retrieval systems, online public access catalogs, federated search, faceted search, discovery tools, search mechanisms

Abstract

This viewpoint article explores Scopus AI—Elsevier’s innovative add-on to the Scopus database—which allows users to engage with Scopus in natural language rather than via Boolean operators. Scopus AI’s strength lies in combining the communication properties of a large language model with the information integrity of peer-reviewed sources. It does not substitute the need to review the literature but can be helpful in search, especially if stakes are low and a systematic approach is unnecessary. Because of increased sophistication of tools and information systems, the degree of competencies required from users also increases. Reasonable understanding of how AI works, as well as search expertise, a critical approach to source evaluation, and scientific skepticism remain essential. With these in place, and with a clear understanding of the purpose of various information tasks, users can be better positioned to decide how best to employ various tools to get the job done.

References

Edward Helmore and Kari Paul, “New York Times Sues OpenAI and Microsoft for Copyright Infringement,” The Guardian, December 28, 2023, https://www.theguardian.com/media/2023/dec/27/new-york-times-openai-microsoft-lawsuit.

James Vincent, “The Scary Truth About AI Copyright Is Nobody Knows What Will Happen Next,” The Verge, November 15, 2022, https://www.theverge.com/23444685/generative-ai-copyright-infringement-legal-fair-use-training-data.

Leticia Antunes Nogueira, “Exploring the Industrial Dynamics of Waste Management and Recycling: A Call for Research and a Proposed Agenda,” Waste Management 170, 2023: 33–39, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2023.07.022.

Leticia Antunes Nogueira, Stine Thordarson Moltubakk, Andreas Fagervik, and Inga Buset Langfeldt, “Cutting Through the Noise: Assessing Tools that Employ Artificial Intelligence,” IFLA Journal, 2025, https://doi.org/10.1177/03400352241304121.

“Scopus AI,” Elsevier, accessed on 12-03-2024, https://www.elsevier.com/products/scopus/scopus-ai.

Scopus AI might let users know if little is found in the database about your question.

Teresa Kubacka, “There Is More to Reliable Chatbots Than Providing Scientific References: The Case of ScopusAI,” The Scholarly Kitchen, February 21, 2024, https://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2024/02/21/guest-post-there-is-more-to-reliable-chatbots-than-providing-scientific-references-the-case-of-scopusai/.

Downloads

Published

2025-03-17

How to Cite

Nogueira, L. A. (2025). Chatbots and Scholarly Databases: Impressions from Trying Out Scopus AI. Information Technology and Libraries, 44(1). https://doi.org/10.5860/ital.v44i1.17116

Issue

Section

Communications