Search arXiv⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2512.22164

Artificial Intelligence Applications in Lean Startup Methodology: A Bibliometric Analysis of Research Trends and Future Directions

Parisa Omidmand·Rasam Dorri·Alireza Mozaffari·Saeid Ataei
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

This study presents a comprehensive bibliometric analysis of the emerging intersection between artificial intelligence (AI) and lean startup methodology. Using the PRISMA 2020 framework, we systematically analyzed 12 peer-reviewed articles published between 2010 and June 2025, sourced from the Scopus database. The analysis employed VOS viewer software to conduct co-authorship, keyword co-occurrence, and citation network analyses. Results reveal three distinct research clusters: operational integration of AI within startup experimentation processes, AI-enhanced learning systems for entrepreneurial contexts, and strategic implications of AI for uncertainty management in startups. The findings indicate a developing research domain characterized by fragmented authorship networks, limited international collaboration, and geographic concentration in developed economies, particularly the United States and Germany. Key research themes include business model innovation, iterative methods, and machine learning applications, with artificial intelligence serving as a bridging concept across thematic clusters. The analysis identifies significant research gaps in ethical considerations, cross-cultural validation, and empirical testing of AI-enabled lean startup frameworks. While current research demonstrates growing interest in AI integration within entrepreneurial experimentation, the field requires enhanced theoretical consolidation, methodological rigor, and interdisciplinary collaboration to achieve practical relevance and academic maturity. This study contributes to the emerging discourse on digital entrepreneurship by providing a systematic overview of research trends and identifying priority areas for future investigation at the intersection of AI and lean startup methodologies.

Explore related subjects

cs.DL

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Parisa Omidmand, Rasam Dorri, Alireza Mozaffari, Saeid Ataei. 2025-12-17. Artificial Intelligence Applications in Lean Startup Methodology: A Bibliometric Analysis of Research Trends and Future Directions. https://arxiv.org/abs/2512.22164

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

The illusion of neutrality in metric-based research evaluation

Venue prestige and citation counts are two widely used, albeit imperfect, signals of research quality. When the two signals conflict, evaluators must decide how much weight to assign each. Yet, it remains unknown how researchers across disciplines trade off these two signals when evaluating research outcome. To fill this gap, we surveyed 869 researchers using paired choices between hypothetical departmental hiring rules that assigned different weights to venue prestige and citation counts, asking which would produce better science. Among 795 respondents whose choices were largely internally consistent, choices placed nearly equal aggregate weight on the two signals. This apparent balance concealed substantial individual heterogeneity: nearly two in five respondents occupied the most venue-heavy or citation-heavy intervals. Moreover, respondents on average chose more citation-heavy rules than they believed their departments used in hiring. By revealing the subjective judgments that arise when research indicators conflict, our findings reinforce calls for greater caution when quantitative indicators are used to evaluate research.

cs.DL↗
arXiv2026

Scoring Grant Applications with Large Language Models

Purpose: Assessing grant applications is time-consuming and difficult, adding to the overall burden of academic peer review. Whilst funders are exploring whether AI can help, there is no published research into the accuracy of Large Language Models (LLMs) for scoring contemporary grants. Design/methodology/approach: This study investigates whether six open-weight LLMs (Gemma 3 1B/4B/12B/27B, DeepSeek R1 32B, Qwen 3 32B) can give useful scores for 2267 recent UK Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC), and Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC) grant applications, comparing them with scores from the original reviewers and funding panel members. Findings: Although the LLM scores are individually inaccurate, when averaged and converted to ranks they correlate positively with expert average scores. The best performing LLM, Gemma 3 27B (10 iterations with varied prompts), had moderate rank correlations with average reviewer scores (mean rho=0.26). Gemma 3 27B's average correlation with individual reviewers was 0.19, which is lower than the inter-reviewer mean correlation of 0.24, suggesting that it scores are slightly weaker than individual reviewer scores. Gemma 3 27B had weak rank correlations with average panel member scores (mean rho=0.17), with lower average correlations with individual panellists (mean rho=0.14), which is substantially lower than the inter-panellist correlation (mean rho=0.38). Whilst the correlations seem too weak to replace expert review at the final panel stage, LLM scores might help with the initial reviewing state, such as by helping identify the weakest proposals for fast-track desk rejections, to replace one human reviewer, or for triangulation to check for bias.

cs.DL↗
arXiv2026

Open Science, Closed Models: How Funding Shapes AI in Science

How funding shapes AI engagement in science is poorly understood despite its structural importance. We analyze 104,226 scientific papers (2018-2025), linking funding acknowledgments to how each paper engages with foundation models: whether it extends a model (fine-tunes or builds on it), uses one without modification, or references models only peripherally. Three findings emerge. First, funding source is associated with the character of engagement: public funding is associated with higher open-weight model engage- ment; private-only funding selectively enables extension with no robust openness association; mixed funding shows nominally the highest open-weight engagement rates in four of the seven largest disciplines. Second, papers acknowledging industry cloud credits are less likely to use open-weight models, consistent with credit programs steering research toward closed models. Third, industry collaboration carries an independent extension premium consistent with internal corporate resources flowing through coauthorship channels invisible to acknowledgment-based measures. This nexus concentrates in Computer Science and Global North collaborations; Global South research is largely excluded. As public funding contracts and industry compute provision expands, scientific AI work shifts toward closed proprietary infrastructure.

cs.DL↗