R0058/2026-04-03/C001/S04¶
WebSearch + WebFetch — Independent bibliometric studies of AI ethics/safety community structure
Summary¶
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
| Source/Database | WebSearch + WebFetch |
| Query terms | "AI ethics" "AI safety" co-authorship network bibliometric separate communities silos |
| Filters | None |
| Results returned | 10 |
| Results selected | 2 |
| Results rejected | 8 |
Selected Results¶
| Result | Title | URL | Rationale |
|---|---|---|---|
| S04-R01 | Charting the Landscape of AI Ethics: A Bibliometric Analysis | https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/ijdlg-2025-0007/html | Independent bibliometric study with collaboration network data (94% connected component) |
| S04-R02 | Understanding AI Trustworthiness: A Scoping Review of AIES & FAccT Articles | https://arxiv.org/html/2510.21293v2 | Scoping review of ethics-focused venues with findings on safety underrepresentation |
Rejected Results¶
| Result | Title | URL | Rationale |
|---|---|---|---|
| S04-R03 | Mind the Gap! (arXiv HTML) | https://arxiv.org/html/2512.10058 | Already captured as S01-R01 |
| S04-R04 | Mind the Gap! (arXiv abs) | https://arxiv.org/abs/2512.10058 | Already captured as S02-R01 |
| S04-R05 | Ethics and privacy of AI (ResearchGate) | https://www.researchgate.net/publication/350582963_Ethics_and_privacy_of_artificial_intelligence_Understandings_from_bibliometrics | Privacy focus, not safety-ethics divide |
| S04-R06 | Ethics and privacy of AI (ScienceDirect) | https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0950705121002574 | Privacy focus, not safety-ethics divide |
| S04-R07 | Ethical Considerations in the Age of AI (West Science) | https://wsj.westsciences.com/index.php/wsshs/article/view/191 | General overview, no community structure analysis |
| S04-R08 | AI ethics in ophthalmology (Nature) | https://www.nature.com/articles/s41746-025-01976-6 | Domain-specific, not relevant |
| S04-R09 | Authorship and AI tools (COPE) | https://publicationethics.org/guidance/cope-position/authorship-and-ai-tools | About AI authorship ethics, not community structure |
| S04-R10 | Ethics of AI (UNESCO) | https://www.unesco.org/en/artificial-intelligence/recommendation-ethics | Policy recommendation, not bibliometric analysis |
Notes¶
Two independent bibliometric studies were found that provide indirect evidence. Neither directly replicates the Roytburg & Miller homophily measurement, but both provide contextual data about AI ethics research community structure.