GenAI study maps global generative AI research hotspots

Scientometric work like the GenAI study covered by GeneOnline does not push model capabilities forward, but it tells us where the intellectual and institutional energy is flowing. By clustering tens of thousands of generative AI papers and mapping who collaborates with whom, the authors surface which subfields—multimodal models, medical GenAI, code generation—are becoming dense research hubs, and which countries and labs are acting as bridges between them.([geneonline.com](https://www.geneonline.com/study-maps-research-trends-in-generative-ai-using-biblioshiny-and-vosviewer-tools/?utm_source=openai))

For the race toward AGI, these maps are useful as early-warning systems. When you see rapid increases in cross-disciplinary citations between, say, reasoning benchmarks and robotics, you can infer that more groups are trying to push beyond pure text or image generation toward embodied or tool-using systems. Conversely, stagnation or fragmentation in safety- or interpretability-related clusters is a sign that governance work is not scaling at the same pace as capability work. Used thoughtfully, scientometrics can help funders, companies and regulators allocate attention and resources to where they will matter most over the next few years.