I recently conducted a quick poll in the AI4LIB community to understand how library and information professionals access paid Large Language Models (LLMs) such as ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, Perplexity, and Grok.
The early results from 24 respondents are revealing:
• 14 (58%) have no access to any paid LLM. • 7 (29%) pay personally for access. • 3 (13%) have both personal and institutional or library access. • 0 respondents reported library-provided subscriptions. • 0 respondents reported institution-provided subscriptions outside the library.
One finding stands out. Not a single respondent reported receiving a paid LLM subscription from their library. This raises important questions. If AI is becoming essential for research, teaching, learning, cataloguing, reference services, and scholarly communication, should access depend on an individual’s willingness or ability to pay?
Libraries have historically provided access to journals, databases, e-books, standards, and software. Perhaps it is time to ask whether institutional AI tools should become part of the digital resource portfolio.
The encouraging sign is that several professionals are already investing their own money to stay current. Their commitment reflects the growing importance of AI in professional practice. However, personal subscriptions are not a sustainable substitute for institutional access.
The next phase of this study is to understand: • Which organisations already provide paid AI access. • Which LLMs are being subscribed to. • Whether subscriptions are managed by libraries, IT departments, or other institutional units.
How is your organisation approaching AI subscriptions? Is your library leading the conversation, or is AI still viewed as a personal productivity tool?
#Libraries #AI #GenerativeAI #ChatGPT #Claude #Gemini #Perplexity #LibraryLeadership #DigitalTransformation #AI4LIB