Organizational Learning in Materials Discovery Campaigns: Which Databases, Calculations, and Agent Teams Pay Off

Scientific agents are mostly evaluated on whether they complete tasks or recover known results; we instead study variation across repeated open-ended campaigns. Sixteen separately initialized sessions of one model-harness configuration received a frozen database of 12,499 metal-organic frameworks, a methane-storage objective, a pinned protocol and a one-week budget. Strategies diverged into four approaches spanning 100--5,000 screened structures, and eight built 2,253 hypothetical structures. Yet the agents recovered the same materials frontier near 200 cm^3/cm^3, and an independent calculation of the database's porous region found its nine best structures all among their reports. Enforced checks on half the agents raised fresh-run reproduction from one of eight to eight of eight but could not detectably improve conclusion validity, because fifteen of sixteen agents selected the same audit-excluded entry, an incomplete structure whose missing anions created artificial pore volume. Replicated agents thus reveal both robust conclusions and common-mode errors from shared inputs.

Evaluating AI agents on scientific research tasks is constrained by the time and resources required for the underlying experiments or calculations. In computational materials research, repeating the same expensive simulations across agents and trials can make evaluation impractical. We introduce CompMat-Bench, a benchmark of 94 tasks derived from recently published computational materials studies, each asking agents to complete a step toward achieving the study's scientific goal. We reproduce the research steps in advance and assess agents on preparing inputs and analyzing outputs for expensive simulations, so expensive simulations can be avoided during evaluation. The reproduced inputs and results serve as ground truth for grading agents with fixed rules, without an LLM judge. The benchmark supports four evaluation conditions: single tasks and workflows composed of related tasks, each with full or reduced methodological guidance. With full guidance on single tasks, agents based on three LLMs demonstrate the ability to complete individual materials research steps, with pass rates of 66.0-90.4% across 94 tasks. Both longer workflows and reduced guidance can limit agent performance, but in different ways for different agents: they lower the pass rates of the weaker agents, whereas the strongest agent falls only when a long workflow is combined with reduced guidance. Failure analysis attributes most failures to scientific errors rather than to errors in software usage. CompMat-Bench provides a basis for comparing agents on the steps of real materials research and for analyzing agent failure modes.

Coordinating multi-scale tasks is an effective strategy for computational materials discovery, yet the diverse algorithms and tools involved make this process highly challenging. Here we present DREAMS, a large language model (LLM)-based agent system capable of executing the entire screening pipeline for metal-organic frameworks (MOFs). DREAMS processes a large body of MOF literature, links publications to their crystal structures, and curates them into a computation-ready database, which is then screened with progressively more expensive simulations. The promising candidates identified for separation under wet flue gas conditions all originate from independent studies. By bridging the heterogeneous stages from literature mining to high-throughput simulation, DREAMS operates across application domains and enables even non-experts to discover high-performance materials in an end-to-end, automated manner.