GITNUXSOFTWARE ADVICE
Science ResearchTop 10 Best IT Research Services of 2026
Top 10 it research services ranked by criteria and tradeoffs, with Gartner and KPMG listed for buyer shortlists and comparisons.
How we ranked these tools
Core product claims cross-referenced against official documentation, changelogs, and independent technical reviews.
Analyzed video reviews and hundreds of written evaluations to capture real-world user experiences with each tool.
AI persona simulations modeled how different user types would experience each tool across common use cases and workflows.
Final rankings reviewed and approved by our editorial team with authority to override AI-generated scores based on domain expertise.
Score: Features 40% · Ease 30% · Value 30%
Gitnux may earn a commission through links on this page — this does not influence rankings. Editorial policy
KuppingerCole is the best fit for enterprise architecture and security teams that need consistent, governance-grade vendor comparisons in IT security and digital identity research, whereas Gartner suits broader enterprise CIO-level governance and sourcing decisions.
Editor’s top 3 picks
Three quick recommendations before you dive into the full comparison below — each one leads on a different dimension.
KuppingerCole
Vendor landscape research that connects technology adoption themes to architecture and governance decision points.
Built for fits when enterprise architecture and security teams need consistent vendor comparisons and governance-grade research..
Gartner
Editor pickGuided analyst inquiry that turns published research into decision-ready answers for specific architectures and vendor shortlists.
Built for fits when enterprise teams need analyst-driven technology and vendor evaluation for governance and sourcing decisions..
Nucleus Research
Editor pickAnalyst interview synthesis translated into vendor landscape and benchmark narratives used in sourcing and planning workshops.
Built for fits when leadership needs consistent market research inputs for vendor shortlisting and technology roadmap alignment..
Comparison Table
KuppingerCole
specialistAnalyst firm specializing in IT security and digital identity research.
Vendor landscape research that connects technology adoption themes to architecture and governance decision points.
KuppingerCole’s core strength is translating market and technology research into decision-ready outputs such as capability mapping, technology trend analysis outputs, and vendor landscape segmentation for stakeholder review. Engagements typically combine analyst interview guide workflows, qualitative coding of findings, and benchmark-style comparisons that make tradeoffs legible across multiple vendors.
A key tradeoff is that KuppingerCole research outputs require internal teams to operationalize recommendations into road map planning and requirements traceability matrix work. KuppingerCole fits best when procurement, enterprise architecture, and security teams need consistent vendor comparisons for RFI and RFP briefing materials.
- +Vendor landscape segmentation that supports compare-and-decide procurement conversations
- +Documented analyst interview protocols that improve stakeholder alignment
- +Decision-ready research findings report outputs for architecture and governance reviews
- +Coverage depth across identity, cloud, and enterprise architecture topics
- –Requires client teams to convert findings into road map artifacts
- –Less suited for hands-on proof-of-concept delivery and implementation execution
- –Research synthesis timelines can limit rapid, same-week iteration cycles
- –Heavier method documentation can add coordination overhead
Enterprise architecture teams
Reference architecture gap and vendor fit
Clear build-versus-buy direction
CISO and security leadership
Security vendor landscape shortlisting
Prioritized shortlist for evaluation
Show 2 more scenarios
Procurement and sourcing teams
RFI briefing and evaluation alignment
Lower ambiguity in vendor responses
Generates structured vendor comparison inputs to tighten RFI question sets and evaluation guidance.
Product strategy leaders
Technology trend analysis for planning
More defensible roadmap bets
Produces technology trend analysis outputs that inform adoption curve thinking and roadmap assumptions.
Best for: Fits when enterprise architecture and security teams need consistent vendor comparisons and governance-grade research.
Gartner
enterprise_vendorGlobal IT research and advisory firm serving CIOs and technology buyers.
Guided analyst inquiry that turns published research into decision-ready answers for specific architectures and vendor shortlists.
Gartner fits teams that need technology research findings report outputs that can be traced into governance conversations about investments, architectures, and sourcing model analysis. Strength shows up in recurring frameworks for technology landscape assessment and peer benchmarking, where the emphasis stays on consistent comparative dimensions across time. The service is also a strong fit for enterprise stakeholders who require analyst interview guide style structured questioning to pressure-test assumptions with experts.
A tradeoff appears in operational automation. Gartner research supports decision workflows through written guidance and analyst Q and A, but it does not provide a native automation and API surface for programmatic ingestion into procurement or ITSM systems. Gartner works best for building a requirements traceability matrix for vendor evaluation meetings, then handing off execution tasks to internal tooling.
- +Frequent vendor landscape updates with consistent comparative dimensions
- +Analyst access supports targeted follow-up on research conclusions
- +Research artifacts map well to governance and sourcing discussions
- +Coverage spans technology trends and enterprise architecture contexts
- –Limited automation and API support for system-to-system workflows
- –Deep research output can require analyst mediation to apply
CIO strategy committees
Plan technology investments and adoption priorities
Aligned roadmap priorities
Procurement and sourcing teams
Evaluate managed services and vendors
Tighter vendor shortlists
Show 2 more scenarios
Enterprise architecture teams
Validate reference architectures and direction
More defensible design choices
Gartner findings help compare application and infrastructure approaches used in enterprise architecture assessment reviews.
Product and platform leaders
Benchmark peer adoption and capability gaps
Clear capability gap plan
Peer benchmarking style research helps map current practice to target capability expectations and maturity models.
Best for: Fits when enterprise teams need analyst-driven technology and vendor evaluation for governance and sourcing decisions.
Nucleus Research
specialistIT research firm focused on technology ROI and value analysis.
Analyst interview synthesis translated into vendor landscape and benchmark narratives used in sourcing and planning workshops.
Nucleus Research typically supports technology trend analysis and technology adoption curve discussions by packaging findings into manager-ready research reports rather than bespoke architecture diagrams. Buyers use it for application and infrastructure decision support where peer benchmarking and vendor landscape context reduce uncertainty before requests for information or requests for proposal are drafted. The engagement fit is strongest when stakeholders need consistent language for technology road map conversations and build-versus-buy comparisons based on analyst interviews and compiled evidence.
A tradeoff appears when teams need direct implementation artifacts such as configuration-level requirements traceability matrix coverage or automated data pipelines into internal systems. Nucleus Research works well when a technology radar style view and sourcing model analysis are needed to align leadership, but it is less suitable as the only source for operational evidence collection tied to a specific enterprise inventory or reference architecture.
- +Analyst interview driven findings for vendor and market comparisons
- +Repeatable research reporting that supports sourcing and roadmap alignment
- +Clear benchmark narratives for peer comparison discussions
- +Structured vendor landscape context for technology planning cycles
- –Limited evidence export for automation into internal data models
- –Less direct support for requirements traceability matrix creation
- –Brokered outcomes depend on stakeholder input during interviews
- –Fit is weaker when an engagement demands deep architecture validation
IT sourcing and procurement teams
Vendor shortlisting with market context
Shortlists align across stakeholders
Enterprise architecture teams
Road map planning for emerging tech
Road map priorities clarified
Show 1 more scenario
Product and platform leaders
Build-versus-buy decision support
Decision rationale documented
Benchmark summaries and scenario narratives inform tradeoffs between internal build and vendor adoption.
Best for: Fits when leadership needs consistent market research inputs for vendor shortlisting and technology roadmap alignment.
Forrester
enterprise_vendorTechnology and market research firm focused on customer-obsessed IT strategy.
Forrester delivers analyst-driven technology trend analysis packaged with structured evaluation guidance for buyer scenarios.
Forrester is an IT research service that converts analyst interviews, surveys, and market signals into technology trend analysis and decision-ready deliverables. It is distinct for its structured research workflow that produces technology trend analysis and vendor landscape briefs tied to buyer scenarios.
For IT organizations, Forrester provides reference point reports for enterprise architecture assessment and application portfolio analysis style planning. Engagements typically fit teams that need executive narratives plus supporting frameworks for technology road map and sourcing model analysis.
- +Analyst-led findings with clear buyer-focused framing for technology planning
- +Repeatable research methodology that supports consistent internal decision discussions
- +Strong vendor landscape coverage for peer benchmarking inputs
- +Deliverables map well to executive technology road map conversations
- –Limited automation for building internal models from research outputs
- –Integration with existing tooling depends on manual redistribution of findings
- –Work product format can require translation into internal governance artifacts
- –API and provisioning surface is not positioned for direct system integration
Best for: Fits when enterprise teams need analyst-based guidance to support architecture and sourcing decisions.
Quocirca
specialistEuropean IT research and analysis firm serving business technology buyers.
Interview-driven evidence capture that turns vendor and buyer signals into decision aids without requiring in-house analyst tooling.
Quocirca delivers IT market research through analyst-led studies that translate vendor, technology, and buyer signals into decision-ready findings. Engagements typically cover technology trend analysis and enterprise architecture assessment angles, with structured inputs gathered via interviews and guided evidence collection.
Coverage often emphasizes vendor landscape mapping and comparative perspectives that inform procurement and sourcing model analysis for complex technology choices. Deliverables are organized into analyst narratives and decision aids that support stakeholder alignment across architects, IT leaders, and procurement teams.
- +Analyst-led interviews produce concrete vendor and buyer comparisons
- +Structured technology trend analysis supports architecture and sourcing discussions
- +Deliverables fit stakeholder reviews with clear decision framing
- +Methodical evidence collection improves traceability from input to conclusion
- –Less suited for implementation-ready technical automation or tooling
- –Governance depth is uneven across engagement types without defined controls
- –Workflows rely heavily on timely client participation for interviews
- –API and system integration surfaces are not the core delivery mechanism
Best for: Fits when buyers need analyst-led IT market research for technology and vendor decisions across architectures.
Context
specialistIT channel and technology market research firm serving vendors and distributors.
Interview protocol and analyst workflow that converts stakeholder inputs into structured, decision-ready research artifacts.
Context provides IT market research and technology trend analysis for enterprise sourcing and planning decisions. It focuses on evidence gathering through analyst-led interviews and structured artifacts that feed technology landscape assessment outputs.
Deliverables align to vendor landscape views and compare build-versus-buy options across defined evaluation criteria. Engagement artifacts are designed to support internal governance, stakeholder alignment, and decision traceability.
- +Analyst-led evidence collection with interview guides geared to stakeholder alignment
- +Vendor landscape and sourcing discussions mapped to explicit evaluation criteria
- +Structured research deliverables that support decision traceability during reviews
- +Technology radar style outputs help prioritize follow-on research and pilots
- –Automation surface and self-serve tooling are limited compared with platform vendors
- –Requires a defined stakeholder set to maintain throughput across interviews
- –Deep enterprise architecture work depends on data provided by the client team
- –Customization of research instruments can increase cycle time for complex scopes
Best for: Fits when enterprise teams need analyst-led IT market research to support vendor selection and build-versus-buy decisions.
ISG
specialistInformation Services Group delivers IT sourcing and market research advisory.
Analyst interview protocols with structured qualitative coding that produce decision-ready narratives for sourcing and architecture teams.
ISG delivers IT market research through structured analyst engagements that connect enterprise goals to vendor landscape analysis and sourcing implications. Engagement outputs typically include technology trend analysis, capability mapping findings, and report artifacts designed for stakeholder review and procurement use.
The differentiator versus lighter research shops is the emphasis on execution support for enterprise architecture assessment and application portfolio analysis workstreams that feed decision forums. ISG also brings research workflows that support peer benchmarking inputs and vendor landscape segmentation.
- +Research artifacts align to technology adoption and sourcing decision points
- +Analyst-led interviews and coding create traceable evidence trails
- +Strong fit for enterprise architecture assessments tied to vendor selection
- +Capable of supporting peer benchmarking inputs across functions
- –Requirements traceability can take longer when stakeholder inputs are delayed
- –Automation depth is limited for teams needing end-to-end scripted delivery
- –Extensibility depends on how client data is packaged for analysts
- –Governance artifacts are workload heavy for small teams
Best for: Fits when enterprises need analyst-driven technology trend analysis tied to vendor selection decisions.
Everest Group
specialistResearch and advisory firm focused on IT services, BPO, and global delivery.
Analyst interview guided research execution that feeds vendor segmentation and managed services evaluation artifacts for buyer deliberations.
Everest Group is an IT market research firm that produces analyst-led technology trend analysis tied to vendor landscape reviews. It is distinct for research execution that pairs structured market coverage with buyer-facing deliverables like vendor segmentation and sourcing model analysis.
Core capabilities include peer benchmarking, capability and maturity assessments, and managed services evaluation workflows used for enterprise architecture assessment and application portfolio analysis decision support. Delivery is built around research reports and custom research engagements that translate findings into actionable recommendations for stakeholder groups.
- +Structured vendor segmentation outputs support consistent sourcing comparisons across stakeholders
- +Analyst interviews and research protocols improve evidence quality for vendor landscape findings
- +Capability and maturity assessment artifacts fit infrastructure and services evaluation use cases
- +Managed services evaluation workbooks translate findings into decision-ready summaries
- –Custom engagement deliverables require internal coordination with analysts and SMEs
- –Automation depth is limited compared with research tools that expose APIs for continuous updates
- –Integration-oriented automation and provisioning for internal systems are not a native focus
- –Turnaround for bespoke research can be harder to plan without a fixed scope
Best for: Fits when enterprises need vendor landscape and peer benchmarking inputs for sourcing and roadmap decisions.
TBR
specialistTechnology Business Research provides IT services and vendor performance analysis.
Evidence collection built around analyst interview guide workflows for turning stakeholder input into market and vendor conclusions.
TBR delivers IT market research outputs that translate analyst interviews and evidence collection into technology trend analysis and vendor landscape views. The service focuses on structured research deliverables such as technology trend analysis, enterprise architecture assessment inputs, and technology adoption curve style insights for planning and sourcing conversations.
TBR is typically used by organizations that need peer benchmarking style comparisons and application and infrastructure oriented research packaging. Engagements usually include stakeholder interview guides and analyst interview protocols as part of the evidence workflow, not just narrative reports.
- +Interview-driven evidence workflow produces traceable technology trend analysis outputs
- +Vendor landscape coverage supports market segmentation and sourcing model analysis discussions
- +Structured deliverables help map research findings into planning artifacts and reviews
- +Research packaging supports both qualitative insights and quantitative benchmarking comparisons
- –Requires clear scoping to fit the intended service provider segmentation boundaries
- –API and automation surface is not a primary delivery channel for most engagements
- –Governance artifacts like audit logs are not delivered as standardized tooling
- –Turnaround depends on data collection readiness from internal stakeholders
Best for: Fits when enterprise teams need analyst-led IT market research for vendor selection and planning inputs tied to evidence.
IDC
enterprise_vendorInternational Data Corporation provides IT market intelligence and forecasting.
Analyst customization built around recurring technology research categories that supports consistent multi-stakeholder reporting.
IDC is an IT market research organization focused on technology trend analysis, enterprise architecture assessment, and IT services market guidance. It publishes analyst-driven technology trend research with vendor landscape coverage and recurring enterprise-facing insights.
Its core engagement model centers on syndicated research output and custom research deliverables for planning, benchmarking, and technology road mapping. Buyers typically use IDC for structured findings that feed internal reviews of demand, adoption, and sourcing options.
- +Analyst-led technology trend analysis tied to enterprise planning timelines
- +Depth across vendor landscape coverage for technology trend analysis
- +Repeatable research formats that support stakeholder-ready technology road mapping
- +Custom research engagements for targeted questions and decision packages
- –Less suitable for high-velocity, build-your-own data extraction workflows
- –Outputs can require internal synthesis to translate into implementation plans
- –Engagement results depend on scoping clarity and stakeholder availability
- –Automation and API surfaces are not positioned for programmatic research ingestion
Best for: Fits when enterprise teams need analyst-backed technology trend analysis to inform planning and sourcing decisions.
Conclusion
After evaluating 10 science research, KuppingerCole stands out as our overall top pick — it scored highest across our combined criteria of features, ease of use, and value, which is why it sits at #1 in the rankings above.
Use the comparison table and detailed reviews above to validate the fit against your own requirements before committing to a tool.
How to Choose the Right it research
This buyer’s guide frames it research as analyst-led technology landscape assessment that turns stakeholder input into decision-ready market narratives and vendor comparisons. It covers KuppingerCole, Gartner, Nucleus Research, Forrester, Quocirca, Context, ISG, Everest Group, TBR, and IDC, each with distinct delivery emphasis across vendor landscape, technology trend analysis, and sourcing decision support.
The guide treats integration depth, automation and API surface, and admin governance controls as the primary differentiators when those capabilities exist in the engagement model. The ranking favors services that translate research outputs into structured artifacts buyers can reuse in architecture governance, vendor shortlists, and build-versus-buy evaluations.
IT research services that convert technology landscape signals into decision-ready vendor and architecture outputs
IT research services capture evidence through analyst interview protocols, structured evaluation frameworks, and recurring technology trend analysis, then publish findings that leadership can use for sourcing and architecture decisions. Services like Gartner guide analyst inquiry to produce decision-ready answers for specific architectures and vendor shortlists, while Forrester packages analyst-led findings into repeatable guidance for buyer scenarios.
Some providers focus more on connecting vendor landscape segmentation to governance and architecture decision points, which is the standout pattern at KuppingerCole. Other providers lean on interview synthesis that becomes vendor landscape and benchmark narratives for sourcing and planning workshops, which appears in Nucleus Research engagements, with evidence export for automation and internal data-model workflows remaining limited across multiple entries.
IT research buyer criteria for vendor comparison, evidence workflow, and reuse
IT research services turn stakeholder input into technology landscape assessment artifacts that stakeholders can reuse in vendor shortlists and architecture governance discussions. The services differ most in how they structure analyst inquiries and how directly the outputs can be converted into internal decision workflows.
Vendor landscape segmentation mapped to governance decision points
KuppingerCole connects vendor landscape segmentation to architecture and governance decision points for compare-and-decide procurement conversations.
Analyst-driven inquiry that produces decision-ready shortlists
Gartner uses guided analyst inquiry to produce decision-ready answers for specific architectures and vendor shortlists, with frequent vendor landscape updates.
Interview synthesis translated into sourcing narratives and benchmark framing
Nucleus Research turns analyst interviews into vendor landscape and benchmark narratives that support sourcing and planning workshops.
Structured buyer scenario guidance that standardizes internal discussions
Forrester packages analyst-led technology trend analysis into repeatable guidance for buyer scenarios that supports consistent internal decision discussions.
Interview protocols that generate traceable decision aids with explicit evaluation criteria
Quocirca captures interview-driven evidence for concrete vendor and buyer comparisons and uses structured technology trend analysis for architecture and sourcing discussions.
Decision framework for matching service delivery style to IT market research outcomes
Start by matching the research delivery model to the decision artifact the enterprise must produce next. If the next decision is a governed compare-and-decide on vendors, the strongest fit tends to be providers that publish segmented vendor landscape outputs tied to governance and architecture decision points.
Choose the delivery style based on who must act on the outputs
If enterprise architecture and security teams need consistent vendor comparisons for governance-grade discussions, KuppingerCole is built around vendor landscape segmentation tied to governance decision points. If enterprise teams rely on analyst interaction to convert published research into decision-ready answers for specific architectures, Gartner fits analyst inquiry workflows that support targeted follow-up.
Require an evidence workflow that matches stakeholder availability
If stakeholder interviews can be scheduled tightly with clear accountability, Context and ISG can convert stakeholder inputs into structured, decision-ready research artifacts. If stakeholder input may arrive late, ISG notes that requirements traceability can take longer when inputs are delayed, which affects project throughput.
Decide whether outputs must integrate into internal models via automation
If internal teams need system-to-system workflows, Gartner reports limited automation and API support for building internal models from research outputs. If automation and evidence export are not a primary requirement, Nucleus Research still provides repeatable research reporting for workshops but offers limited evidence export for automation into internal data models.
Select for governance traceability depth versus implementation execution
If governance traceability and vendor landscape segmentation for procurement conversations matter more than proof-of-concept execution, KuppingerCole is designed to require clients to convert findings into road map artifacts. If implementation-ready technical automation is required, Quocirca positions itself as less suited for implementation-ready technical automation and tooling.
Constrain the scope to the service provider segmentation boundaries
If the enterprise has a precise target for service provider segmentation boundaries, TBR emphasizes scoping because API and automation surface is not a primary delivery channel for most engagements. If the enterprise needs engagement deliverables that are custom-built through analyst and SME coordination, Everest Group highlights that custom deliverables require internal coordination, which affects planning.
Who benefits from IT research services with analyst workflows and vendor landscape outputs
IT research services fit teams that must turn technology landscape signals into decisions that stakeholders can sign off on. The best fit depends on whether the organization needs vendor comparison artifacts for governance, analyst-supported shortlist guidance, or interview-driven sourcing narratives.
Enterprise architecture and security teams standardizing vendor evaluation
KuppingerCole supports consistent vendor comparisons and governance-grade research by connecting vendor landscape segmentation to architecture and governance decision points.
Sourcing and procurement teams running compare-and-decide conversations
Gartner and KuppingerCole both emphasize vendor landscape comparisons, with Gartner providing analyst access for targeted follow-up and KuppingerCole supporting segmentation designed for procurement discussions.
Product planning and strategy leaders running workshop-driven roadmap alignment
Nucleus Research focuses on analyst interview synthesis translated into vendor landscape and benchmark narratives that support sourcing and technology roadmap alignment workshops.
IT governance programs that need traceable evidence from interviews
ISG uses analyst interview protocols with structured qualitative coding to create traceable evidence trails that align research artifacts to technology adoption and sourcing decision points.
Common selection pitfalls in IT research services procurement
Misalignment between the next decision and the research delivery model causes delays and forces internal rework. The most frequent issues come from assuming research outputs will plug directly into internal automation, or from skipping scoping work needed for evidence traceability.
Assuming the service provider will deliver implementation-ready automation and internal model extraction
Gartner reports limited automation and API support for system-to-system workflows, and Forrester reports integration with existing tooling often depends on manual redistribution of findings.
Choosing based on the volume of research output rather than the governance traceability workflow
KuppingerCole notes clients must convert findings into road map artifacts, and ISG notes requirements traceability can take longer when stakeholder inputs are delayed.
Skipping scope boundaries that determine how vendor landscape and segmentation artifacts are produced
TBR emphasizes scoping to fit intended service provider segmentation boundaries, and Everest Group notes custom engagement deliverables require internal coordination with analysts and SMEs.
Treating analyst interview evidence as plug-and-play without a stakeholder plan
Context requires a defined stakeholder set to maintain throughput across interviews, and Quocirca frames governance depth as uneven across engagement types without defined controls.
How We Selected and Ranked These Providers
We evaluated KuppingerCole, Gartner, Nucleus Research, Forrester, Quocirca, Context, ISG, Everest Group, TBR, and IDC on features at 40 percent weight, ease at 30 percent weight, and value at 30 percent weight. KuppingerCole placed highest because its standout pattern connects vendor landscape segmentation to architecture and governance decision points and because it pairs that with documented analyst interview protocols to improve stakeholder alignment.
Gartner ranked next because guided analyst inquiry turns published research into decision-ready answers for specific architectures and vendor shortlists, supported by frequent vendor landscape updates with consistent comparative dimensions. Nucleus Research and Forrester followed for strong interview synthesis into vendor and benchmark narratives or repeatable buyer scenario guidance, while multiple providers scored lower when automation and API surface were limited for internal workflow integration.
Frequently Asked Questions About it research
How do Gartner and KuppingerCole differ when converting IT market research into decision-ready outputs?
Which service providers are strongest for stakeholder-aligned vendor shortlists built from evidence capture?
When do KuppingerCole and ISG typically lead to better enterprise architecture assessment outcomes than lighter research engagements?
What breaks if Gartner research needs programmatic ingestion into procurement or ITSM workflows?
How do Nucleus Research and Forrester differ in output format when teams need technology trend analysis for road map discussions?
Which providers handle maturity and capability assessments more directly for sourcing and managed services evaluation workstreams?
When teams must run build-versus-buy analysis, how do Context and Everest Group differ in research artifacts and traceability needs?
What security and compliance constraints tend to shape research delivery for KuppingerCole versus IDC?
How do onboarding and delivery models typically differ between Quocirca and Context for managing analyst interviews and structured evidence capture?
Tools reviewed
Primary sources checked during evaluation.
Referenced in the comparison table and product reviews above.
- Science ResearchTop 10 Best HR Research Services of 2026
- Science ResearchTop 10 Best Health Care Research Services of 2026
- Science ResearchTop 10 Best Industrial Research Services of 2026
- Data Science AnalyticsTop 10 Best It Analytics Software of 2026
- Market ResearchTop 10 Best It Portfolio Software of 2026
Keep exploring
Comparing two specific tools?
Software Alternatives
See head-to-head software comparisons with feature breakdowns, pricing, and our recommendation for each use case.
Explore software alternatives→In this category
Science Research alternatives
See side-by-side comparisons of science research tools and pick the right one for your stack.
Compare science research tools→