By Justin Lahart

The Massachusetts Institute of Technology said Friday it can no longer stand behind a widely circulated paper on artificial intelligence written by a doctoral student in its economics program.

The paper said that the introduction of an AI tool in a materials-science lab led to gains in new discoveries, but had more ambiguous effects on the scientists who used it.

MIT didn't name the student in its statement Friday, but it did name the paper. That paper, by Aidan Toner-Rodgers, was covered by The Wall Street Journal and other media outlets.

In a press release, MIT said it "has no confidence in the provenance, reliability or validity of the data and has no confidence in the veracity of the research contained in the paper."

The university said the author of the paper is no longer at MIT.

Toner-Rodgers didn't respond to requests for comment.

The paper said that after an AI tool was implemented at a large materials-science lab, researchers discovered significantly more materials -- a result that suggested that, in certain settings, AI could substantially improve worker productivity. But it also showed that most of the productivity gains went to scientists who were already highly effective, and that overall the AI tool made scientists less happy about their work.

The paper was championed by MIT economists Daron Acemoglu, who won the 2024 economics Nobel, and David Autor. The two said they were approached in January by a computer scientist with experience in materials science who questioned how the technology worked, and how a lab that he wasn't aware of had experienced gains in innovation. Unable to resolve those concerns, they brought it to the attention of MIT, which began conducting a review.

MIT didn't give details about what it believes is wrong with the paper. It cited "student privacy laws and MIT policy."

Toner-Rodgers presented the paper at a National Bureau of Economic Research conference in November. The paper is on the preprint site arXiv, where researchers post papers prior to peer review.

MIT said it has asked for the paper to be removed from arXiv. The paper was submitted to the Quarterly Journal of Economics, a leading economics journal, but was still being evaluated. MIT has asked that it be withdrawn from consideration.

"More than just embarrassing, it's heartbreaking," Autor said.

Write to Justin Lahart at Justin.Lahart@wsj.com

(END) Dow Jones Newswires

May 16, 2025 09:46 ET (13:46 GMT)

Copyright (c) 2025 Dow Jones & Company, Inc.