Zamani, SSinha, R2025-02-132025-02-132024-05-10ACM Inroads, ISSN: 2153-2184 (Print); 2153-2192 (Online), Association for Computing Machinery (ACM), 15(2), 48-50. doi: 10.1145/36573042153-21842153-2192http://hdl.handle.net/10292/18652In this opinion piece, we question the efficacy of students conducting systematic reviews (SRs) at the very start of their PhDs, especially now that we are riding, or drowning in, the Generative AI wave. How would the ubiquitous availability of Generative AI tools shape PhD research and supervision, and how can we capitalize on such disruptions? We report our reflections about early-stage PhD research from 10+ PhD supervisions completed by Sinha, and a recently started PhD project with Zamani as the student. We conducted a systematic literature review following traditional methods for the first four months and then revisited the task using ChatGPT and other related tools. We opine that while SRs still have value for new students, Generative AI must be incorporated, with care, to significantly enhance student learning, reinvest time savings into other, often-ignored skills, and improve the quality (breadth and depth) of SRs.Copyright © 2024 Owner/Author. Permission to make digital or hard copies of part or all of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for third-party components of this work must be honored. For all other uses, contact the Owner/Author.Journal ArticleOpenAccess10.1145/3657304