arXiv:2607. 00436v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language model agents are increasingly connected to scientific software, yet it remains unclear when tool access makes scientific computation more reliable rather than merely more complex.
arXiv:2606. 09774v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Configuring an advanced scientific simulator, translating a modeling goal into a valid, runnable input deck, is a persistent bottleneck that costs domain scientists hours to days.
arXiv:2608. 10366v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Real-world data science involves long-horizon workflows that span data wrangling, exploration, modeling, visualization, and validation, and require coordinated use of tools such as notebooks, IDEs, terminals, browsers, and databases within real operating environments.
arXiv:2606. 16802v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Current computer-use benchmarks primarily focus on software operation tasks in virtualized systems, whereas scientific instrumentation scenarios require coordinated control over complex interfaces, and feedback-driven parameter adjustment.
arXiv:2609.24165v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Synchrotron data reduction, detector calibration followed by azimuthal integration of terabyte-scale diffraction series, is a multi-step, expert-bound...
FrontierChallenge is a cross‑domain benchmark that releases 300 end‑to‑end scientific workflows, of which 97 are evaluated in this study. The benchmark covers diverse fields such as quantum chemistry, molecular dynamics, materials characterization, analytical chemistry, life science, and electrochemistry/environment, and requires agents to produce a bundle of fixed scientific deliverables. Twelve frontier models were tested, and the best configurations completed only 20 of the 97 tasks, achieving a 20.6% pass rate; high partial scores and confident completion claims often did not translate into full delivery, especially in analytical chemistry and electrochemistry/environment.
ToolGate is an executable acceptance pipeline designed to streamline the creation of scientific benchmarks that rely on specialist software. It evaluates each model-generated item through three gates: (1) an executable solution script must reproduce the proposed answer, (2) a randomized no‑tool screen rejects items solvable without the software, and (3) a tool‑using agent must solve the item within a time limit. In a FEniCSx instantiation, 500 generation attempts produced 128 unique, verified benchmark items after successive filtering.
arXiv:2606. 09774v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Advanced scientific simulators expose specialized input languages that turn simulation goals into executable configurations, but learning them can cost domain scientists hours to days.
Scientific agents increasingly analyze data, execute code, and produce research artifacts, yet most benchmarks emphasize final answers, isolated programs, or a single domain. We introduce FrontierChal...
arXiv:2608. 11232v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Evaluating LLM coding agents in algorithmic trading is difficult because static benchmarks risk data contamination and numerical backtest outputs require ground truth from actual code execution.
OpenAI4S is an open‑source scientific research agent that treats code as action and science as sessions, combining a persistent computing runtime with structured session management. It uses tool calls for orchestration, executes code cells in persistent Python and R kernels, and records an append‑only Action Ledger, per‑cell execution logs, versioned artifacts, environment snapshots, and workspace checkpoints to preserve provenance and enable session recovery, branching, and extension. Evaluated on 36 research scenarios—including retrosynthesis, molecular dynamics, and protein design—OpenAI4S achieved a higher overall score (7.83) than a general‑purpose coding harness, especially on long‑horizon, computation‑intensive workflows, though reproducibility remains an open challenge. whyItMatters":"The system demonstrates that persistent execution coupled with session‑level provenance can enhance the reliability of AI‑assisted scientific workflows, as evidenced by its superior performance across diverse research scenarios."
arXiv:2606. 11337v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Scientific AI agents increasingly retrieve evidence, reason across sources, and synthesize conclusions used in consequential decisions.
The paper introduces AutoMat, a benchmark designed to test large language model (LLM) coding agents on their ability to reproduce claims from computational materials science. AutoMat presents three challenges: reconstructing underspecified procedures, navigating specialized toolchains, and assessing whether the evidence supports a claim. Experiments show that current LLM agents achieve low success rates, with the best setting reaching only 53%, and failures stem mainly from incomplete procedures, methodological deviations, and execution fragility.