An expert at University of Oxford says that computers can greatly assist scientific work, but they cannot truly understand science the way humans do. In a detailed commentary, the specialist explained how machines excel at processing data and executing algorithms. However, they lack the ability to form understanding, ask meaningful questions, or grasp scientific context.

The expert noted that scientists use computers to analyse large data sets, to run complex simulations, and to test models rapidly. Because computers handle these tasks quickly and precisely, they enhance researchers’ capacity to explore hypotheses and organise results. At the same time, humans must interpret outputs and decide what those results mean.

The expert said that computers help “do science” in terms of data handling, but understanding remains a human domain.

📊 How Computers Transform Scientific Research

Computers have significantly changed how science is done. Without them, many modern techniques in fields such as genomics, particle physics, and climate modelling would not be possible. Moreover, machine learning and artificial intelligence provide tools that identify patterns too subtle for manual analysis.

Meanwhile, scientists often wonder whether machines will eventually replace human insight. However, the Oxford specialist argued that such machines would still not understand what they compute. Instead, they would continue to act as powerful tools that extend human capabilities.

In addition, computers help researchers design experiments and reduce trial-and-error. For example, algorithms can propose candidate solutions or suggest new lines of inquiry based on prior results. Yet scientists must decide whether the proposed directions make sense in context.

📚 Why Human Insight Matters in Science

Scientific understanding depends on context, creativity, and judgment. Researchers develop new theories by connecting disparate ideas and raising questions that machines cannot generate. Therefore, human curiosity and interpretation remain essential.

The Oxford expert emphasised that computers cannot choose research questions, assess ethical limits, or translate findings into real-world solutions on their own. In contrast, scientists integrate a mix of intuition, theory, and experience when they interpret results.

Furthermore, computers do not possess awareness of background knowledge in a subject area. Even when they detect correlations, they cannot infer causation without human guidance. In short, machines analyse; humans understand.

🔬 The Role of AI in Future Science

Artificial intelligence will continue to advance, and researchers expect it to play a bigger role in scientific workflows. Because AI can search vast literature and automate tedious tasks, it frees scientists to focus on higher-level thinking. Meanwhile, computers can help uncover patterns that lead to new insights.

However, the Oxford expert insisted that AI will remain a tool rather than a replacement for human scientific reasoning. Science advances when humans choose where to look, why it matters, and how results should be validated.