AI for Science

Follow this topic Ask about this topic

Momentum

11 papers in the last four weeks, up 120% on the four weeks before. 0.1% of all new papers.

Jul 13Week of Sep 28

Latest papers 117

Oct 8, 2026cs.AI

OpenProblemBench: Benchmarking AI on Open Problems in the Foundational Theoretical Sciences

The next frontier for artificial general intelligence is tackling unresolved scientific problems, calling for benchmarks that assess progress beyond established knowledge. We introduce OpenProblemBench, a benchmark of 82 unresolved problems drawn from the mathematics and theoretical physics literature. Each problem supplies the research context, assumptions, and prior progress needed to investigate the question. We select problems whose proposed solutions admit comparatively clear checks of their decisive mathematical or computational claims. Four evaluator models independently assess the correctness, completeness, and degree of progress of each submission without reference solutions. Across seven evaluated configurations, GPT-6-Astra achieves the highest mean judged solve rate of 14.0%, compared with 5.5-6.7% for the evaluated full-size open models and 2.4-3.7% for Flash models. Case comparisons connect stronger outcomes to changes in problem representation, general arguments that extend beyond finite evidence, and proofs of the steps needed to complete a solution. By grounding evaluation in questions arising from the research literature, OpenProblemBench provides a setting for investigating the capabilities and limitations of AI as a contributor to foundational theoretical science.

Zhiyi Li, Sihan Hu, Tianning Xiao +4

Department of Modern Physics, University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei, Anhui 230026, China · CAS Key Laboratory of Theoretical Physics, Institute of Theoretical Physics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100190, China · Hefei National Laboratory, University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230088, China +3

AI for Science Scientific Reasoning in Language Models Mathematical Reasoning Benchmarks

Oct 7, 2026cs.AI

SciExam for ENSO: Can AI Agents Build Climate Models?

Language-model agents are increasingly asked to carry out open-ended scientific research, yet their results are usually graded against a known answer, a rubric, or a language-model reviewer, none of which can tell whether a new scientific model is valid. The AI Science Exam for El Nino-Southern Oscillation (SciExam for ENSO) is a benchmark in which agents build low-order stochastic models of ENSO, the dominant mode of interannual climate variability, from real observations. Within a six-hour budget, agents process the observations, write their own diagnostics, which are then frozen, and develop a model using only these diagnostics as feedback. Hidden graders then test whether the model reproduces ENSO's statistics, recovers unobserved variables, and forecasts held-out years, and score a published model in the same way. Across twelve agent systems, six produce models that score higher than the published model, mainly through better reconstruction and forecasting. The simplified forms of the stronger models are each compatible with one of the two competing explanations of ENSO's warm-cold asymmetry, an open debate that the task never mentions. Controlled runs of the top system under varied information suggest that its scores do not come from recalling the dated observational record and that the information it receives shapes how it builds its model. SciExam for ENSO can thus evaluate agent research where no answer is known, and the results suggest that agents can already build competitive models whose structures bear on questions that scientists still debate.

Yinling Zhang, Langchen Liu, Dongbin Xiu +4

The Ohio State University · Yale University · University of California, San Diego +2

AI for Science AI Agent Benchmarks Scientific Discovery AI Agent Evaluation Climate Modeling

Oct 4, 2026cs.AI

AutoSciBench: Autonomous Benchmark Generation for Evaluating Scientific Agents

As agents rapidly evolve, existing benchmarks can become saturated, limiting their ability to distinguish capabilities and reveal remaining failure modes. Particularly in scientific domains, constructing and updating benchmarks requires substantial time, labor, and domain expertise, making it difficult to keep evaluation aligned with advances in agent capabilities. We address this challenge by investigating whether scientific-agent benchmarks can be automatically generated and iteratively adapted as agent capabilities evolve. We introduce AutoSciBench, a framework that represents each task as a high-level concept specifying the scientific domain, data modality, and required reasoning approach, together with a low-level recipe specifying how the question, environment, and ground-truth answer are constructed and verified. Agents attempt to solve each task, producing solver trajectories and corresponding judge feedback which AutoSciBench uses to revise the recipe or concept, closing observed shortcuts and shifting tasks toward raw-data re-examination, interpretation of intermediate results, and evidence integration. Experience distilled from completed refinement trajectories further guides new concept generation, allowing lessons from earlier task refinement to inform subsequent benchmark construction. Starting from existing benchmarks, we evaluate AutoSciBench across computational biology, materials science, and clinical imaging. Generated benchmarks reduce average solver accuracy by 22.4 and 25.5 percentage points relative to the human-curated benchmarks in computational biology and materials science, respectively, while generated tasks receive higher average quality ratings across all three domains, suggesting that scientific-agent evaluation can adapt as agent capabilities advance.

Dongki Kim, Namkyeong Lee, Surag Nair +7

Genentech · KAIST

AI for Science AI Agent Evaluation AI Agent Benchmarks Synthetic Benchmark Generation

Sep 30, 2026cs.AI

OSWorld-Science: A Benchmark of Computer Use Agents for Learning and Using Scientific Software

Scientific software presents a demanding test for computer-using agents based on visual language models (VLMs): completing a research workflow requires interpreting specialized interfaces, manipulating scientific objects, and producing verifiable results. We thus introduce OSWorld-Science, a benchmark and evaluation environment that combines scientifically meaningful tasks, artifact-based evaluation, and an efficient agent harness for studying computer use in the scientific domain. The benchmark contains 12 VLMs and 146 high-quality tasks across several scientific domains and software configurations, covering workflows such as molecular drawing and retrosynthesis, pathology image analysis, statistical computing, and physical simulation. Tasks are developed through expert proposals and iterative human--AI co-design, with selection guided by scientific value and difficulty. Task-specific execution-based evaluators inspect application states and generated artifacts, including molecular structures, segmentation masks, plots, and numerical results, and award partial credit for incomplete outcomes. Our special harness integrates model adapters, interaction-loop control, and trajectory logging to support comparisons of models and interaction strategies. Our results show that current state-of-the-art VLMs with a strong harness still face challenges in addressing key questions in the scientific domains. We also analyze the benchmarking results across multi-linguistics, reasoning efforts, context length and other factors and derive several important conclusions and directions to assist future development. Overall, we provide an integrated framework connecting expert-defined scientific goals to verifiable software outcomes, enabling systematic evaluation of both agent capabilities and harness design in scientific workflows.

Dingyuan Dai, Heli Qi, Lei Liu +28

University of California, Los Angeles · RIKEN AIP · Yale University +12

Computer-Use Agent Benchmarks AI for Science Computer-Use Agents Scientific Workflow Automation LLM Agent Harnesses

Sep 29, 2026hep-ph

Searching for BSM Experimental Signatures with Large Lagrangian Models

The search for physics Beyond the Standard Model (BSM) is generally limited not by the supply of theory descriptions but by the lack of discriminating experimental observations. A case in point is dark matter, where the overwhelming gravitational evidence only goes so far in distinguishing between models within a vast theory space. Exploring the space of testable model signatures may help identify overlooked experimental observables and indicate the utility of future experiments. A challenge is designing a search through model signatures outside what is found in the literature. Our primary contribution is hAIthem, a framework that combines the self-guided exploration of reinforcement learning (RL) with the broad literature-derived knowledge of LLMs. We build an RL agent that learns to find which portions of a theory's high-dimensional parameter space are not excluded under some subset of constraints by playing a Battleship-style "game" against a suite of phenomenology tools. The agent is built as a Large Lagrangian Model (LLaM), an autoregressive transformer that reads a tokenized Lagrangian, is pretrained at scale (here on ~1 billion tokens from ~10,000 Lagrangians), and is fine-tuned in a live environment. The framework then constructs a decision tree that separates RL-found regions using observables computed with established tools, and passes the remaining degenerate regions to a set of LLM agents that compete to produce realistic signatures. In this proof of concept, RL-search outperforms an evolutionary-algorithm baseline, finding more viable regions with greater physical diversity. In a restricted space of single dark scalar multiplet models, we find that hAIthem proposes interesting combinations of previously studied observables, such as the application of a halo-independent kinematic ratio to paleo-detectors.

Ibrahim Elsharkawy, Victoria Knapp-Perez, Wahid Bhimji +1

Department of Physics, University of Toronto and Vector Institute, Toronto, ON, Canada · NERSC, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Berkeley, California, USA · Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of California, Irvine, CA 92697 +3

AI for Science High-Energy Physics Large Language Model-Guided Scientific Discovery

Sep 26, 2026cs.DC

ASCEND: Personal AI Agents for Autonomous Scientific Computing Across HPC Clusters and GPU Workstations

Traditional scientific computing requires researchers to translate intent into environment configuration, resource requests, and executable jobs, then diagnose failures from scheduler state and logs. We present ASCEND (Autonomous Scientific Computing Engine and Novel Discovery), an AI-powered agent interface that supports several placements of the agent and, in the arrangement used for every case here, runs it on the researcher's own laptop, reaching Slurm-managed clusters and a GPU workstation over a multiplexed authenticated connection, with site policies checked by locally executed tools. The language model agent (Claude Code or Codex, selected at each launch) is hosted remotely and proposes actions but holds no credentials. No facility-scale service is required: an account on each resource suffices, and the public installer lets users link their own clusters or workstations. We report four recorded cases: 1) The agent closed a failure-recovery loop on a planted tensor-device fault, diagnosing, repairing and resubmitting with job-level artifacts preserved. 2) It reproduced the published evaluation of a weather-forecasting model from released forecasts, recovering an evaluation protocol the paper does not fully state and matching the published curves to 2.1 percent on z500 and 2.4 percent on t850. 3) It parallelized a released 12,693-line geophysical solver under a requirement of bit-for-bit identity with the serial build, cutting runtime from about twelve hours to two. 4) That requirement exposed two instances of undefined behaviour in the solver; both were repaired and reported upstream. Separately, the deployed policy validator rejected 29 of 30 constructed violations and held the last for approval, while denying 3 of 14 legitimate requests. Autonomy was exercised under author supervision using the Claude Code runtime; a controlled end-to-end recovery benchmark remains outstanding.

J. Paul Liu, Uthpala Herath, Andrew Petersen

AI Hub for Science, College of Sciences, NC State University, Raleigh, NC · Research Computing and Support Services, Office of Information Technology, Duke University, Durham, NC · Office of Information Technology, NC State University, Raleigh, NC

AI for Science High-Performance Computing Autonomous Research Agents

Sep 23, 2026cs.LG

PhyMo: A Physical-Field Modality for Multimodal AI4Physics

Multimodal learning is emerging as a powerful paradigm for AI for Physics (AI4Physics), where predicting physical systems requires the joint interpretation of heterogeneous observations, measurements, and domain knowledge. However, existing approaches typically represent physical quantities and governing equations as generic numerical or textual tokens, overlooking the physical constraints that determine their spatiotemporal interactions. To address this limitation, we introduce the \textbf{physical-field modality} and propose \textbf{PhyMo}, a physics-grounded multimodal framework that organizes heterogeneous measurements through PDE-associated operators. PhyMo follows a three-stage learning procedure: the physical-field encoder is first pretrained through field reconstruction under PDE residual supervision, its representations are subsequently aligned with visual embeddings in a shared latent space, and the fused multimodal representations are finally processed by corresponding downstream prediction heads. Experiments on five datasets spanning diverse physical environments show that PhyMo achieves state-of-the-art performance, compared to the strongest baseline on each dataset, demonstrating the superiority of PhyMo on multimodal representation learning in AI4Physics.

Henan Sun, Haitao Hu, Jin Liu +4

The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology (Guangzhou) · Huawei Noah’s Ark Lab · Tencent HY +1

AI for Science Cross-Modal Representation Learning Multimodal Pretraining Physics-Informed ML Multimodal Learning

Sep 21, 2026cs.PL

Beyond Natural Language: An Agent-Native Language for Autonomous Science

As autonomous AI agents take on every stage of scientific inquiry, research output is expanding far beyond human review capacity. Yet scientific communication still relies on natural-language prose: an informal medium prone to ambiguity, hidden assumptions, and untracked limitations that machines cannot reliably audit. We introduce Lara, a machine-checkable language and protocol for checking and revising support for research claims. By turning research arguments into executable artifacts, Lara provides an epistemic kernel for autonomous science: it enables automated validation pipelines for research agents, lets declared bridges connect arguments across papers into an auditable network, and allows both humans and machines to recheck the standing of an encoded claim in milliseconds. In a Lara program, authors explicitly declare their claims, supporting evidence and assumptions, and known objections or limitations. A lightweight, deterministic checker adjudicates these interactions, assigning each claim a reproducible status: "justified", "defeated", "contested", or "gap", which marks a claim whose support is incomplete and locates the unanswered question. Case studies cover empirical review, a philosophical debate without measurements, and the loss of support when an assumed axiom is withdrawn. We establish the metatheory of claim checking and cross-context argument transport, and mechanize the semantic guarantees in Lean 4 (roughly 117,000 lines), leaving three arguments on paper. The audited public metatheory is "sorry"-free and uses only Lean's three standard axioms; some executable examples additionally trust native evaluation.

Yifeng He, Jiachen Liu

ARA Lab

AI for Science Scientific Communication Formal Verification Computational Argumentation Scientific Claim Verification

Sep 16, 2026cs.CL

ScienceIDE: Turning World's Scientific Codebase into Agent Learnable Environments

Scientific code repositories encode decades of human knowledge in executable models, methods, and tools. Yet fragmented toolchains, implicit domain conventions, and specialized correctness criteria make this knowledge difficult to convert into reliable learning experience-a challenge we call the scientific experience bottleneck. We introduce ScienceIDE, infrastructure for turning the world's scientific code into programmable environments for scientific agents. Guided by expert-defined scientific cases and acceptance criteria, agents transform repositories into executable environments that support task generation, execution, and scientific verification. These environments provide a shared foundation for supervised fine-tuning, reinforcement learning, and evaluation. Using verified interaction trajectories, we train PhAI-IDE-72B, PhAI-IDE-9B, and PhAI-IDE-4B. The model family shows gains in held-out scientific-code repair and across selected general-purpose benchmarks in code, reasoning, and knowledge, providing evidence of positive transfer from scientific experience to broader capabilities. ScienceIDE lays the foundation for an integrated workspace for agent learning and scientific practice, making humanity's scientific software a shared substrate for developing scientific intelligence. Code: https://github.com/aitofound/ScienceIDE

Hejia Geng, Zesen Huang, Haoyang Li +42

Sep 15, 2026cs.CL

PrimeScientist: Strategic Allocation of Research Effort in Autonomous Research

Autonomous research agents aim to automate scientific workflows, from proposing ideas to conducting experiments and analyzing results. Yet current AI and research agents can propose more directions than available resources allow them to pursue. Moreover, each attempt could consume substantial resources, requiring agents to reconsider how to invest in subsequent research. Thus, deciding how to invest research effort strategically should be a defining capability of autonomous research agents. Accordingly, we introduce PrimeScientist, which jointly determines research direction and resource investment across successive research attempts. Specifically, we formulate this challenge of strategic research effort allocation as a sequential decision problem where remaining resources should explicitly guide the research policy. We first introduce an executable plan tree that preserves competing plans and their outcomes across attempts. Building on this representation, we propose an adaptive MCTS-based allocation policy that balances exploration and exploitation using experimental feedback and remaining resources. Comprehensive evaluations across AI research, systems and code optimization, and machine learning engineering show that strategic allocation improves research quality and sample efficiency together. Across 12 AI research tasks, PrimeScientist improves average reward by 10.3% with 50.6% fewer research attempts than AutoResearch under the same resource budget. We believe making research effort allocation an explicit optimization target establishes effective resource use as a core research capability for autonomous agents to drive scientific breakthroughs at scale.

Xinle Yu, Fan Bai, Kaiser Sun +5

UC San Diego · Johns Hopkins University

AI for Science Autonomous Research Agents

Sep 14, 2026cs.AI

The AI-Enabled Scientific Frontier

As artificial intelligence's capabilities improve, it is increasingly viewed as a general scientific method. But how true are these claims? Does AI outperform all techniques, or only some, and how is this changing? To assess the claims, we assemble a corpus of 2,507 head-to-head comparisons between AI and other scientific analysis techniques across 27 scientific disciplines from papers published between 2000 and early 2025. We find a profound dichotomy. Relative to traditional statistics, AI often outperforms, but at a significantly higher computational cost. But there are also nearly a quarter of cases where AI is both more expensive and performs worse than traditional statistical techniques and this fraction has been stable for a decade. Relative to scientific computing, AI often underperforms, but at lower computational cost. This has begun to change: since 2020, AI's performance against scientific computing has notably strengthened and it now outperforms on more than half of comparisons. These patterns suggest that AI is therefore not a universal replacement for existing methods, but rather a valuable -- and improving -- part of a new AI-enabled scientific frontier.

Gabriel Manso, Emma Fu, Neil Thompson

1MIT CSAIL, MIT FutureTech

AI for Science AI-Assisted Scientific Research

Sep 10, 2026cs.AI

OpenDiscoveryTrace: Process Traces for Evaluating AI Scientist Workflows

Existing benchmarks for autonomous AI scientists evaluate only final outputs---generated code, hypotheses, or papers---yet discard the reasoning process by which those outputs were obtained. This makes it impossible to audit scientific methodology, diagnose failure modes, or distinguish systematic reasoning from fortunate guessing. We present \textbf{OpenDiscoveryTrace}, a public dataset of 558 complete AI scientific agent trajectories that captures how models reason, not just what they produce. Each trajectory records a structured 9-field-per-step trace---including thoughts, tool calls, observations, errors, revision triggers, and self-reported confidence---as models execute 124 scientific tasks spanning drug discovery, materials science, genomics, and scientific literature analysis. The dataset covers seven models: three frontier models (GPT-5.4, Claude Opus 4.6, and Gemini 3.1 Pro; 124 trajectories each, fully balanced across domains and difficulty levels) and four open-weight models (Qwen2.5-7B, Mistral-7B-v0.3, Phi-3.5-mini, and Qwen2.5-1.5B; 30 each), plus 60 live-retrieval variant trajectories. Pilot analysis on 363 LLM-judged trajectories reveals that process traces expose behavioral differences invisible to output-only evaluation: all three frontier models achieve comparable success rates (84--89%), yet Claude Opus 4.6 produces 30

\times

more errors than GPT-5.4 (2.5 vs. 0.08 per trajectory,

p < 0.0001

, Cliff's

\delta = 0.613

), with qualitatively different error profiles---66.7% tool misuse for Claude versus 83.6% reasoning errors for GPT-5.4. We define five benchmark tasks with baselines from logistic regression, random forests, LSTMs, and Transformer models. The dataset, trace schema, agent harness, and benchmark definitions are publicly available under CC BY 4.0 to support research on process-level evaluation, scientific agent auditing, and AI governance.

Aayam Bansal, Keertan Balaji

AI for Science AI Agent Auditing LLM Auditing AI Agent Evaluation Agent Evaluation AI Agent Benchmarks

Sep 7, 2026cs.AI

AgentIdeaBench: Benchmarking Scientific Ideation in the Agent Era

Scientific ideation is the capacity to formulate novel and testable hypotheses from scientific evidence, and autonomous AI scientists depend on it. Existing evaluations largely assess it by asking models to generate ideas from a static, curated set of reference papers. That passive setup departs from the retrieval-and-reasoning workflow of modern AI scientists, and it becomes less discriminative as models improve. We introduce AgentIdeaBench, a multidisciplinary benchmark that evaluates scientific ideation under two matched settings, static observation and active exploration. We report matched Static-Active evaluations for 33 LLMs across 40 densely scored subfields spanning five disciplines, using a multidimensional, literature-verified scoring framework whose critics assess originality against retrieved prior art. Active exploration reveals considerably more capability headroom, and that headroom is unevenly distributed across models. Performance scales about twice as fast as under static observation, and the exploration gain is capability-gated, favoring the strongest models over the weakest. The gain reflects better grounding, improving feasibility, clarity, and specificity while leaving measured originality unchanged under our critics. We further explore Scientific World Modeling, a generation-time loop that refines a draft hypothesis through structured thought experiments. It benefits mid-capability models, and its impact diminishes among frontier models that appear to have internalized such reasoning patterns already. AgentIdeaBench gives future work on scientific ideation a measurement basis suited to the agent era.

Yunxiang Mo, Tianshi Zheng, Yisen Gao +7

Department of Computer Science and Engineering, HKUST, Hong Kong SAR, China · NVIDIA AI Technology Center (NVAITC), NVIDIA, Santa Clara, USA

AI for Science AI Agent Evaluation Scientific Hypothesis Generation AI Agent Benchmarks Research Idea Generation

Aug 30, 2026cs.CL

Scientific Agent Skills: A Library of Procedural Knowledge for Research Agents

A language-model agent asked to analyse an experiment will usually return working code. Whether the analysis is defensible is a different question. A defensible analysis depends on procedural choices: which test the field accepts, which identifier namespace is authoritative, and which caveats must accompany a result. We present Scientific Agent Skills, an open library of 163 such procedures in 16 areas of practice, including genomics, cheminformatics, medical imaging, study design and scientific communication. Each skill is a directory built around a versioned, human-readable instruction file. An agent loads the file only when a task calls for it; the directory often also contains reference material and runnable scripts. We report no task-level evaluation and no host selection rate. We measure two properties of the documentation corpus: the always-resident descriptions of all 163 skills cost 7.1% of a 200,000-token window, and the median documented workflow fits within 23.9% of it, although 29 of 46 would overflow if every reference file were loaded. Openly licensed and available at https://github.com/K-Dense-AI/scientific-agent-skills.

Timothy Kassis, Vinayak Agarwal, Yuhuan He +2

K-Dense, Inc.

AI for Science LLM Agent Skill Retrieval Scientific Workflow Automation

Aug 26, 2026cs.AI

BixBench3: Benchmarking AI agents on research-study-scale computational biology tasks

Artificial intelligence (AI) promises to accelerate biological research by automating computational analyses. Yet the ability of AI agents to execute on computational biology at the scale of complete research studies has not been systematically evaluated. Here we introduce BixBench3, a benchmark that measures the capacity of AI agents to process raw biological data through to scientific results. We designed BixBench3 tasks to mirror the delegation of work from a scientist to an agent: the scientist chooses the research question and high-level methods, then delegates implementation of all analyses to the agent. In each task, an agent receives a research objective, methodological guidance, and raw data derived from a published scientific study, and must execute a sequence of analyses to achieve the research objective. The data artifacts resulting from these analyses, such as peak call matrices or differential expression tables, are programmatically graded against the corresponding artifacts generated and reported in the original study. Across 20 BixBench3 tasks encompassing the generation of 138 unique artifacts, we find that 13 frontier models achieve scores ranging from 0.00 for Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite to 0.48 for GPT 5.6 Sol. Agents perform worse on tasks with larger raw datasets (0.36 on tasks with <100 GB versus 0.10 on tasks with >100 GB) and on analyses requiring more sequential steps (0.36 at 1-2 steps vs 0.24 at 3+). On average, agents use 6.8 hours, 102 million tokens, and $43 to complete each task, with the longest attempts consuming 24 hours, 1.07 billion tokens, and $525. Notably, the highest-scoring agents used fewer tokens and were cheaper than less performant options. These results reveal that LLMs vary substantially in their ability to (1) execute multiple sequential analysis steps coherently, (2) manage large quantities of raw data, and (3) work across scientific domains.

Zane Koch, Asmamaw T. Wassie, Javier Valdes-Aleman +5

Edison Scientific, Inc., San Francisco, CA, USA

AI for Science AI Agent Benchmarks Scientific Workflow Automation Agent Benchmarks Data Analysis Agents

Aug 21, 2026cs.AI

K-Bench: measuring model performance on real scientific agent requests

Benchmarks for scientific artificial intelligence are mostly written to be scored: multiple-choice questions, curated agent tasks with reference solutions, or simulators with a known generative structure. Real scientific requests arrive differently. They are underspecified, they carry attachments, and they lack ground truth. We report K-Bench 01, an evaluation built from first-turn requests sampled from live user traffic on K-Dense Web and run end to end by nine frontier models in identical sandboxes, yielding 1,602 completed agent runs. Three blinded language-model judges scored every run against an eight-dimension rubric. On a rubric whose 8-anchor is defined as work a domain scientist would accept with minor edits, no model clears the line under all three judges. gpt-5.6-sol has the highest pooled mean, 8.04, but its 95% interval [7.80, 8.23] spans the threshold, and two of the three judges rank claude-opus-5 first instead. We therefore report the ordering of systems as the reproducible quantity, the absolute level as an attribute of the instrument, and the top of the table as unresolved. Across all 39,934 scored judgments -- the eight dimension scores plus a holistic overall for each assessment, excluding not-applicable cells -- 47.6% fall below the 8-point threshold. Difficulty is not uniform across the rubric: scientific accuracy averages 6.22 against 7.33 for communication, on identical denominators and in the same direction within every one of the nine models. The single leading failure tag is overclaiming, on 31.4% of assessments. We argue that the informative quantity for scientific agents is not a leaderboard position but the joint distribution of what was delivered, what was claimed, and what artifacts were produced.

Aubrey M. Brueckner, Darshil Patel, Yuhuan He +1

1K-Dense, Inc.

AI for Science LLM Agent Evaluation AI Agent Benchmarks LLM Agent Reliability

Aug 11, 2026cs.AI

Apodex Discovery: Reality Benchmarks and Environments for Evaluating and Building Discoverative Artificial Intelligence

Apollo did not reach the Moon merely because its engineers could solve difficult equations. It succeeded by turning a distant ambition into a mission architecture of explicit objectives, simulation, verification, and repeated correction. AI now faces a similar transition: frontier models can solve difficult tasks once the problem, tools, and success criteria are specified, yet consequential real-world challenges rarely arrive in an executable or verifiable form. We introduce Apodex Discovery, a framework for building and evaluating discoverative AI through the heavy-duty solver, a system comprising a foundation model, harness, tools, and control policies that pursues extended, stateful, verifiable investigations. It has three core components. First, a problem-scouting process surveyed 561 industries across 16 sectors, assembled 423 high-value real-world problems, and selected 20 for the initial release. Second, a common environment-task-episode abstraction provides data, tools, constraints, feedback, trajectory recording, and verification of intermediate artifacts and final submissions. Third, HDS6 evaluates Tools, Repair, Alternatives, Coherence, Evidence, and Scope independently of final-task success. In AAV capsid design, Apodex surpassed the published state of the art by 7% across viability, tropism, structure prediction, and generative design. In drug repurposing and reformulation, a task-specific biomedical environment improved the mean normalized prediction score of GPT-5.5 and GPT-5.6-sol by 2.5 and 7.6 points over the same closed-book backbone. Controlled ablations show that the fixed TRACES episode interface enables attribution of performance differences to specific solver components. Apodex Discovery moves AI evaluation beyond predefined benchmarks toward verifiable investigations aimed at genuine discovery.

Brian Wang, Bin Feng, Xiaoman Pan +26

AI for Science AI Agent Evaluation AI Agent Benchmarks Autonomous Scientific Discovery

Aug 11, 2026cs.AI

Nutrition Data Infrastructure for the AI Era: Operationalizing FAIR for Agent-Mediated Research

AI agents can accelerate nutrition research, but their analyses inherit the identity, semantic, and release ambiguities of the underlying data. We present Nutrition Data Service (NDS), source-preserving infrastructure that operationalizes FAIR for automated use: description resolution makes release-specific records findable; typed crosswalks connect independently released resources; machine-readable interfaces expose versioned sources and crosswalks, supporting replayable and auditable analyses. On food-description benchmarks, NDS outperforms the best published language-model result on NutriBench. External and blinded crosswalk evaluations show that its typed contract favors defensible links and rejects unsupported mappings. In a person-level glycemic-index analysis, pinned NDS inputs produce identical outputs across models and repeated runs, while open-web reconstruction remains unstable. Together, these results show that agent-mediated nutrition research requires a new infrastructure that makes data identity, search, and crosswalk policy explicit.

Lin Liao, Peng Li

AI for Science Entity Resolution Data Provenance Scientific Reproducibility

Aug 5, 2026q-bio.NC

The ethics of artificial intelligence in the life sciences: Universality, cultural diversity and an architecture of care

The life sciences and health research have started to benefit from artificial intelligence, which raises ethical concerns that are real but, we argue, not special. Any science should be governed by values that rest on how the human brain is built and socialised rather than anything distinct to artificial intelligence. Importantly, the human brain has a different, much less costly computational architecture than these machines. This is achieved through the orchestration of a global neuronal workspace, and through reward best described not as a quantity to be maximised but as a continuous cycle of wanting, liking and satiety. As such, this creates the deep tension running through the ethics of the human person, between the universality of ethical judgement and the diversity of morals. The brain networks of the global workspace and emotion are universally shared, but the diversity of content is shaped by epigenetic appropriation of the particulars of the physical, social and cultural world, which makes every person unique. Still, if we were to build machines on these principles rather than the present unaffordable reward maximisers, the question of their governance would change from restraint to upbringing. We set out the institutions such a future would require, together with the questions that remain open.

Jean-Pierre Changeux, Gustavo Deco, Morten L. Kringelbach

Neuroscience Department, Institut Pasteur, Collège de France, Paris F-75005, France. · Center for Brain and Cognition, Computational Neuroscience Group, Faculty of Medicine and Life Sciences, Universitat Pompeu Fabra, Barcelona, Spain · Institució Catalana de la Recerca i Estudis Avançats (ICREA), Barcelona, Spain +4

AI for Science Human-Centered AI AI Governance Responsible AI

Aug 4, 2026cs.AI

Can LLM design high-quality experiments? A Comprehensive and Systematic Benchmark on Autonomous Experimental Design

AI for Research (AI4Research) leverages AI to automate and improve scientific workflows. While experimental design is a critical stage of the research process, prior work has focused primarily on code implementation and execution, overlooking the importance of this stage, and no benchmark exists to evaluate AI's ability to conduct systematic experiment design. To bridge this gap, we propose SCOPE, a Scientific COmprehensive Planning Evaluation Benchmark constructed from 300 high-quality latest papers across 19 research domains from top-tier venues (e.g., ICML, NeurIPS, and ICLR),evaluating LLMs on two dimensions: High-Level planning completeness (main, ablation, and analysis experiments) and Low-Level configuration accuracy and rationality (datasets, baselines, and metrics). Benchmarking reveals three findings: (1) most LLMs cannot directly design high-quality experiments; (2) all LLMs exhibit a performance bottleneck in low-level configuration; and (3) search mode does not improve design quality. Furthermore, to address these challenges, we propose OptED, a novel agentic workflow to optimize LLM-based experimental design, that enhances LLM-based experimental planning through stage isolation, tool augmentation, and rule-based constraints, effectively alleviating the configuration bottleneck.

Zejun Liu, Jian Wu, Ru Peng +4

Westlake University · Zhejiang University · Nanjing University of Science and Technology +1

AI for Science Benchmark Design AI Agent Benchmarks Large Language Model-Guided Scientific Discovery Autonomous Experimentation

Aug 4, 2026cs.RO

POMDPs for Autonomous Science Exploration

Autonomous exploration missions require decision-making under sensor uncertainty and computational constraints, yet integrating scientific representations into POMDP planning has remained intractable due to high-dimensional observation spaces. Information-theoretic planners overcome this by assuming deterministic observations, sacrificing the principled uncertainty quantification that POMDPs provide. We introduce the Science Hypothesis Map POMDP (SHM-POMDP), which makes science-driven belief-space planning more tractable by branching on inferred physical properties rather than raw sensor data. This preserves full sensor information through learned observation models while enabling the planner to reason jointly about navigation and scientific properties under uncertainty. On an extended RockSample domain with 50-dimensional observations, SHM-POMDP achieves 18.6% higher rewards and 32.9% reduced computation time per step than continuous-observation baselines. On realistic geologic exploration using Cuprite hyperspectral data, SHM-POMDP achieves 2.5

\times

higher information gain than the best information-theoretic baseline by maintaining beliefs and replanning adaptively---reaching 80% of oracle performance using only uniform priors. These results demonstrate that integrating hierarchical probabilistic models into belief-space planning enables tractable, principled autonomous science that outperforms both traditional POMDP methods and science-aware information-theoretic approaches.

Daniel Guirguis, Nathan Wallace, Hanna Kurniawati +1

Belief-Space Planning AI for Science Autonomous Scientific Discovery Partially Observable Markov Decision Processes

Aug 3, 2026cs.AI

Towards a new paradigm of scientific discovery with socialized artificial intelligence

Scientific discovery has advanced through successive transformations in the organization of knowledge. Observation and experimentation established the empirical foundations of science. Theory made it possible to derive general principles from particular phenomena. Computation extended inquiry into systems beyond direct observation, while data-intensive methods opened new spaces of pattern and prediction. Science now confronts a different frontier. The central challenge is no longer simply to produce more information, but to organize expanding knowledge, reasoning, and evidence into a coherent process of discovery. Here, we introduce Bridging Literature, Agents, and Zero-gap Experimentation (BLAZE), a paradigm of socialized scientific intelligence. BLAZE conceives AI not as an assistant for isolated research tasks, but as an organizational infrastructure for scientific discovery. It connects persistent knowledge, collective reasoning, empirical validation, and human judgment within a continuous research lifecycle, transforming fragmented activities into a cumulative process of inquiry, criticism, and revision. The central premise of BLAZE is that scientific intelligence does not arise from computation alone. It emerges from the sustained interaction among knowledge, hypotheses, experiments, and collective verification. By organizing humans and machines within a shared scientific process, BLAZE makes discovery more traceable, reproducible, and cumulative while preserving human creativity, judgment, and responsibility. Socialized scientific intelligence may provide a foundation for the next era of science. Its purpose is not to replace human discovery, but to extend the scale, depth, and continuity of collective scientific inquiry.

Xinjie Yao, Xingxin Xu, Xiyuan Gao +21

Baize Research · Faculty of Information Engineering and Automation, Kunming University of Science and Technology · Yunnan Key Laboratory of Artificial Intelligence, Kunming University of Science and Technology +5

AI for Science Human-in-the-Loop AI Autonomous Scientific Discovery Scientific Workflow Automation

Aug 2, 2026cs.AI

Auditing Discovery Claims: A Two-Sided Criterion for Agentic Science, with the Negative Side Decidable

When a self-improving AI-for-science system claims a new capability, the evidence is usually a benchmark delta, a description-length gate, or a p-value. None separates a real gain from extra search, from a changed verifier, or from adaptation to a fallible oracle. We build a two-sided audit whose negative side is a formal fact: a pseudoknot-free oracle provably cannot represent a crossing base pair, so the prior verifier's range is bounded exactly, offline, before any run. "New" is relative to the agent's prior self, never to the base model. First, how far a single fallible oracle can inflate a capability claim. An invented, solver-free operator solves 43/60 crossing RNA targets under the predictor it optimizes, above a context-free floor of 0/60; under three predictors, 1/60 survives. Paired on the same 43 targets, a predictor the operator never saw confirms 2 of its designs against 26 for a minimum-free-energy solver (p = 8e-7). No statistic computed from the system and its own oracle sees that gap. Second, agent-written procedures can beat a human-written one under a judge no objective can flatter, at a fraction of the compute. Of six frontier models, the two whose operators ran without timeouts carry over at 0.293 against our 0.095 (n = 951 paired units, target-clustered [+0.108, +0.297], p = 5e-5) while spending 4.6-10x fewer oracle calls. Three rungs: difference under an outside adjudicator (reached), not bought with compute (reached, both directions), mechanism identified and transferable (not reached; seven candidates tested, none moves the statistic). The ceiling is the panel itself: its three predictors share nearest-neighbour thermodynamic parameters, two agreeing at kappa = 0.673. The audit is as unsparing about our own system: matched undirected search is an exact zero, and a search-free probe puts 84% of our headline effect on targets a random sequence already solves.

Wenhui Chen, Jianlin Chen, Ziyao Lin +1

University of Macau · 2South China University of Technology

Reward Hacking AI for Science AI Agent Auditing AI Agent Evaluation Scientific Claim Verification

Aug 1, 2026cs.SE

Artificial Intelligence and Modeling & Simulation: An Overview

Artificial intelligence (AI) and Modeling & Simulation (M&S) are increasingly intertwined, reflecting converging research needs across both communities, rapid technological advances such as the rise of generative AI, and the growing availability of data and computational resources. This report provides a structured overview of the intersections of AI and M&S. The relationship goes both ways: AI can support, augment, or even replace components of simulation studies, while simulations can serve as data generators, training environments, and evaluation platforms for AI. We organize this landscape along the stages of M&S from model specification and input modeling to execution, experimentation, verification and validation, and output analysis. Selected studies at each stage illustrates how techniques such as Large Language Models have reshaped simulation practices, while highlighting limitations and open challenges. This report also provides a conceptual roadmap that helps readers navigate a rapidly changing ecosystem.

Niclas Feldkamp, Philippe J. Giabbanelli, Istvan David

Technische Universität Ilmenau, Germany · VMASC, Old Dominion University, USA · McSCert, McMaster University, Canada

Jul 31, 2026cs.DL

A robust association between LLM use and scientific productivity: Assessing stopping-time selection

Renault, Bergeaud, and Bosquet (hereafter RBB) argue that dating LLM adoption as the first month in which an author's abstract is flagged induces a stopping-time selection that can produce a positive event-study path even when there is no causal effect. Although this mechanism is mathematically possible, it does not constitute proof of a null effect. Recalibrating RBB's own random placebo to the detector's realized flag rate, we show that the measured association stays well above this benchmark, so the artifact is too small to explain the productivity changes. We further re-estimate the association between LLM adoption and productivity with a series of complementary designs in which the timing artifact cannot bias the estimate: a before-and-after comparison that dates adoption in one year and measures output in another, a conservative control group for difference-in-differences, an intensity-based specification that never defines an adoption date, and a rank-based measurement holding the flag rate fixed. A positive productivity association persists across all of these estimates, while the same tests run on pre-ChatGPT placebo data return null effects. The artifact RBB identify is real but bounded, and it does not account for the pattern we report.

Keigo Kusumegi, Xinyu Yang, Paul Ginsparg +3

AI for Science Causal Effect Estimation Causal Inference

Jul 30, 2026cs.AI

An AI Scientist that Doesn't Drift: Taste, Structure, and Falsifiable Findings in a Quadruped Navigation Research Loop

Autonomous research loops driven by large language models can run machine-learning experiments at scale but tend to drift toward local refinements of whichever metric they optimise rather than testing the hypotheses that motivate the experiments. We address this structurally and present an AI Scientist for studying generalisation in quadruped robot navigation policies in simulation. Building on the autoresearch paradigm of Karpathy, our loop adds three components: an immutable experiment card that pairs each iteration's prediction with its outcome under a fixed schema, so a falsified hypothesis cannot be retconned; specialised subagents restricted to mechanical roles; and kkanbu, a preference oracle that holds the user's research taste as a typed knowledge graph and is the only component permitted to make subjective judgements. To isolate the oracle we run the identical loop twice across eleven research streams, with and without kkanbu. Neither arm drifts: both falsify roughly three quarters of their own hypotheses, and the best trained policy comes from the oracle-less arm. What the oracle changes is direction, not score: it alone explores test-time adaptation, it authored the winning designs where its arm led, and it carried lessons across streams that the other arm repeatedly re-derived. The scaffold keeps the loop honest; kkanbu decides where it looks.

Yiwen Zhang, Eloise Zeng, Jaeha Lee +1

Division of Physics, Mathematics and Astronomy, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, CA 91125, U.S.A. · Department of Mechanical and Civil Engineering, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, CA 91125, U.S.A.

AI for Science Human-in-the-Loop AI Autonomous Experimentation Autonomous Research Agents

Jul 30, 2026cs.IR

TCA-SIR: Learning Target-Conditioned Abstractions for Scientific Inspiration Retrieval

Scientific hypothesis generation for AI for Science typically involves Scientific Inspiration Retrieval (SIR) followed by hypothesis composition. Existing SIR methods rank papers by topical similarity and do not explicitly represent how a candidate inspiration transfers to a target problem. This is especially limiting for remote inspirations, whose value often lies in reusable problem-solving principles rather than topical overlap. Motivated by how humans abstract transferable aspects of a source and remap them to a new target, we reformulate SIR as target-conditioned abstraction (TCA). The retrieval object is a transferable abstract principle extracted from a candidate specifically for the target. We present TCA-SIR, which learns to generate target-conditioned abstractions and uses their representations to predict transferability. On ResearchBench, TCA-SIR outperforms prior SIR methods and direct LLM retrieval, improving HitRate@top4% over MOOSE-Chem by more than 10 percentage points. Learned abstractions also recover target-relevant mechanisms more clearly than an untrained TCA prompt, yielding both stronger retrieval and an interpretable rationale for scientific inspiration.

Yuto Suzuki, Farnoush Banaei-Kashani

Department of Computer Science and Engineering, University of Colorado Denver Denver, Colorado, USA

AI for Science Scientific Hypothesis Generation

Jul 30, 2026cs.AI

SciToolAgent-Evo: An Ontology-Aware Self-Evolving Agent for Open-World Scientific Tool Acquisition

Large language model (LLM) agents have been increasingly adopted in scientific research for organizing and invoking specialized computational tools. However, their reliance on predefined tool spaces with static semantics limits their applicability to open-world scientific workflows, where tool requirements, capabilities, and boundaries evolve dynamically. To this end, we propose SciToolAgent-Evo, an ontology-aware self-evolving agent for open-world scientific tool acquisition. Driven by an evolving memory of skills, experiences, and an ontologized tool graph, it distills generalizable knowledge from contrastive trajectories during accumulation, whereas during inference, it formulates active requests and utilizes a LinUCB-based bandit gate to dynamically balance exploration and exploitation. Once a novel tool is acquired, its scientific ontology is completed online for seamless integration into the known graph. Moreover, we introduce OpenSciToolBench, a benchmark containing 900 realistic tasks across four difficulty levels. Extensive evaluations show that SciToolAgent-Evo achieves state-of-the-art performance, validating its robustness and generalization.

Yuqi Tang, Chenyi Zhou, Libin Wang +3

College of Computer Science and Technology, Zhejiang University · ZJU-Hangzhou Global Scientific and Technological Innovation Center, Zhejiang University · ZJU-UIUC Institute, Zhejiang University

AI for Science LLM Agent Skill Learning Self-Evolving Agents

Jul 30, 2026physics.hist-ph

Can AI Follow In Einstein's Footsteps?

AI is accelerating physics discovery, but perhaps away from Einstein-level theory building. To understand this gap, we must recognize a striking trend: while being very successful, the most visible AI contributions to physics discovery appear to mirror the historical development of physics, but in reverse. Human discovery in physics progressed, in broad strokes, from ancient pattern prediction, through phenomenological laws such as Kepler's, to principle-based universal theories such as relativity and the Standard Model. On the AI side, prominent contributions to physics discovery point in the opposite direction: early milestones emphasized explicit equation-discovery methods, such as symbolic regression, whereas more recent frontier contributions are powerful predictors such as AlphaFold and GraphCast, which can be remarkably accurate yet do not provide clear theoretical understanding. If this trend continues, AI would become extraordinarily good at prediction but may struggle to ever propose its first serious contender to quantum gravity or other paradigm-level theories. We review the current landscape of AI for physics discovery and highlight a critical missing skill: the ability to pose the right questions or invent the right principles to guide the development of new theories and the tests to falsify them. This mode of discovery has driven many of the deepest advances since the 17th century, where symmetry, simplicity, and new mathematical frameworks guided theory construction before experimental tests. Equipping AI systems with such skills could move them from predicting within known frameworks to proposing the next paradigm-level discovery in physics.

Michael Shalyt, Nathan Regev, Marin Soljačić +1

Technion - Israel Institute of Technology, Haifa 3200003, Israel. · Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge MA 02139, USA.

AI for Science Scientific Hypothesis Generation Autonomous Scientific Discovery

Jul 24, 2026physics.med-ph

Agentic Autoresearch for CT Reconstruction

Comparing CT reconstruction methods fairly is labor-intensive and largely manual, and many benchmarks use idealized data. We ask whether a large language model (LLM) agent can do the labor of reconstruction research on its own, and whether a ranking measured on ideal data predicts behavior under realistic noise. We built an agentic loop: the agent edits a solver, runs a short cluster job, reads one frozen metric, and revises. The metric is a calibrated headroom score against the FBP baseline, inside the field of view; every method shares the same differentiable fan-beam projector. We benchmarked 26 methods on Mayo low-dose CT (noise-limited) and a 128-view sparse-view breast task from the noiseless DL-Sparse-View Challenge, with validation-selected iterations scored on a held-out test set. Every trained breast model was then re-scored on noisy inputs (I_0 = 10^5 photons) without retraining, and separately retrained on matched noise. The agent independently implemented, tuned, and benchmarked all 26 methods, and recombined them into a compact solver of 969 parameters that ties the top Mayo tier at the 1% level using 0.4% of the champion's parameters. Benchmarking gives a tier of statistically indistinguishable top methods, not one winner. Mild input noise nearly inverts the breast ranking: the noiseless champion (a supervised image denoiser, hr 0.89) collapses to 0.00, while a learned primal-dual method rises to champion (0.72 to 0.93). An ideal-data leaderboard therefore does not predict robustness. The inversion is a transfer effect, not a permanent deficit: retraining on matched noise restores much of the clean ranking (Spearman rho 0.04 to 0.61). Noise is only the easiest confounder in an open-ended set (beam hardening, scatter, anatomy, disease), so no single-factor challenge certifies generality. Benchmarks should model a broad spectrum of realistic factors at once.

Andreas Maier, Lucas Kachelriess, Siming Bayer +4

Pattern Recognition Lab, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg (FAU), Erlangen, Germany · Department Artificial Intelligence in Biomedical Engineering (AIBE), Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg (FAU), Erlangen, Germany · Universitätsklinikum Erlangen (UKER), Erlangen, Germany +2

AI for Science Sparse-View CT Reconstruction Noise Robustness Computed Tomography