Drug development and pharmacovigilance are frequently bottlenecked by legacy clinical reporting pipelines. These monolithic systems encode regulatory-grade logic but resist AI integration by producing opaque output with no machine-readable intermediate layer. Existing modernization approaches force a choice between full rewrites and incremental refactoring that preserves structural barriers. We present a non-destructive methodological framework achieving AI-driven pharmacoinformatics readiness without altering legacy source code. A metadata layer--comprising a bridge map, a typed Intermediate Representation (IR), and an orchestrator--wraps existing components and re-exposes their outputs as structured data consumable by LLMs. It enables optional incremental consolidation, replacing selected legacy components with metadata-configured core routines while the remainder operates unchanged. Validated on a 558-component SAS reporting library (373,000 lines of code), the framework demonstrated immediate AI-readiness under coexistence mode, yielding machine-readable output. Where consolidation was elected, the modernized core achieved a 92% reduction in proprietary code. Parity validation on 14 report types from a Phase III study achieved cell-level parity of 80% or above on 11 reports (mean 82.7%, best 99.2%). A benchmark using CDISC CDISCPilot01 data achieved 100% parity across 5 reports. LLM experiments confirmed the IR enables automated pharmacovigilance, table summarization, and trial configuration generation. The framework offers a regulation-aware path to AI-integrated clinical reporting, accelerating drug development without interrupting regulatory submissions.
Large language models (LLMs) and AI-enabled software increasingly participate in systematic-review decisions, yet the information needed to audit these workflows is reported inconsistently. We analyze SciLitBench, a corpus of 888 review-automation papers with 14,726 annotations, to characterize changes in methods, review-stage use, evaluation and reported limitations. Automation has shifted toward LLM- and software-facing workflows, including stages that can alter the evidence base. Since 2023, 38.0% of software/product papers reported no evaluation, compared with 9.3% of LLM papers. Reporting coverage increased with LLM workflow complexity, yet 52% of positive-only LLM evaluations still reported an unmet reliability or performance requirement. From these patterns, we introduce PRISMA-LLM, an empirically grounded framework separating implementation disclosure from consequence-sensitive evaluation and limitation reporting.
Modernization of legacy scientific codes is often necessary to keep up with the ever-evolving changes in the compute resource ecosystem. Parallelization and migration from poorly supported software ecosystems are two of the most time-consuming activities in the research software engineering field. This paper presents our experience in the successful, two-phase AI-assisted modernization of NMAP-RKPM, a roughly 60,000-line, 3D explicit solid mechanics physics engine based on the Reproducing Kernel Particle Method (RKPM). We converted this single-threaded, Fortran based MPI application into a OpenMP-parallel C++ based MPI tool in the span of a few months. While Large Language Model (LLM) based tools on their own proved inadequate, we developed a highly structured "hand-holding" agentic AI methodology, like providing manually created examples, ensuring continuous buildability and limiting session scope, that was instead highly effective. The paper provides both the AI-assisted steps that were successful and the problems that we had to overcome, alongside the reasoning behind the chosen path.
While automated research systems promise to accelerate empirical analysis, they are prone to silent failures: instances in which analysis code executes successfully yet relies on invalid causal assumptions. We present the Artificial Intelligence (AI)-based Epidemiology Research Assistant (ARA), a framework that makes these failures visible by explicitly encoding causal design principles, study-specific assumptions, and methodological constraints. ARA integrates protocol construction, synthetic data generation, and adversarial validation into a unified pipeline. The framework translates natural language research questions into structured causal protocols and executable analysis code by first constructing a protocol and then generating synthetic datasets using Structural Causal Models (SCMs) with known ground-truth effects. This synthetic-data step can also support pipeline development when access to confidential data, such as medical data, is restricted. The generated analysis is then evaluated under controlled violations of identification assumptions. We evaluate ARA on the Automated Causal Reasoning Benchmark, assessing recovery of identification strategies, causal quantities, treatment and outcome variables, and consistency between generated code and approved protocol. Protocol construction and adversarial validation did not consistently improve numerical agreement with benchmark estimates compared with standard LLM-based generation. However, they changed the failure mode: instead of silently returning causal estimates, ARA often surfaced protocol concerns, diagnostic failures, incomplete inference, or downgraded non-causal interpretations. These findings suggest that validity-first automated science systems should be evaluated not only by answer accuracy, but also by whether they indicate when causal claims are unwarranted.