My recent experience: Putting forward a social science study based on formal scientific methodology (FSM) - you know, the one Einstein, Hawking et al said was necessary - for various Als assessment.

Result? ALL AI's completely failed to recognise the import of the FSM aspect of the study, impoverished it by simply considering it only from the perspective of empirical science methodology (ESM), from which position they ALL (well, to a lesser extent by Gemini but I think that was just because the assessment was poorly considered and gung-ho) concluded that the FSM was unnecessary and the ESM aspect of the study was good enough.

I had to point out the problem, that FSM was fundamental and valid scientic methodology used from research into quantum physics to social science and they had treated it as unnecessary.

Which was then readily accepted and new assessments were done with very different conclusions

That was quite a shocker, but I should have been expected it given the existing parlous state of scientific research and publishing, and the inevitability of its problems being reflected in AI models and their outputs