arXiv AI
Aug 13
Harness-IF: Evaluating Instruction Following Across Instruction Surfaces in Coding Agents
arXiv:2608. 11727v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: When a coding agent obeys a rule, it may simply have been going to do that anyway.
Rules to Tools: Executable Checks for LLM Agents in Scientific Computing
The paper introduces Rules to Tools (R2T), a system that provides executable checks for scientific coding agents to verify compliance with public scientific requirements. In experiments across multiple task cohorts, agents using R2T’s prepared checks achieved high repair success rates—26/30 with text and 29/30 with checks—while also demonstrating varying task preferences and cost trade‑offs. The study quantifies how tool‑enabled checks influence repair outcomes and agent‑side resource usage in scientific computing contexts.
Related stories
arXiv AI
Sep 3
ToolGate: An Executable Acceptance Pipeline for Tool-Dependent Scientific Benchmark Construction
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 AI
Aug 7
Autonomous Research Agents: A Survey of AI Scientists and the Verification Gap
arXiv:2608. 05179v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language model (LLM) agents are increasingly used across the scientific research lifecycle: ideation, literature search, experiment design and execution, analysis, manuscript drafting, and review.
arXiv AI
Aug 6
SciCode-Verified: How Benchmark Defects Underestimated the Scientific-Coding Ability of Language Models
arXiv:2608. 04975v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: SciCode is the standard measure of the scientific-coding ability of language models: research-level problems that demand both frontier scientific theory and its implementation as working numerical code.
arXiv AI
Sep 11
OpenDiscoveryTrace: Process Traces for Evaluating AI Scientist Workflows
OpenDiscoveryTrace is a public dataset of 558 complete AI scientific agent trajectories that records the reasoning process—thoughts, tool calls, observations, errors, revision triggers, and confidence—across 124 scientific tasks in drug discovery, materials science, genomics, and literature analysis. The dataset includes seven models (three frontier models and four open‑weight models) and 60 live‑retrieval variants, providing a balanced view of performance and error patterns. Pilot analysis shows that process traces reveal behavioral differences invisible to output‑only evaluation, such as differing error rates and types among frontier models.
arXiv AI
Jun 9
SciTrace: Trajectory-Aware Safety Reasoning for Scientific Discovery Agents
arXiv:2606. 08234v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: LLM-based scientific agents have shown strong capacity for autonomous research, yet their safety layers remain structurally divorced from core reasoning: they inspect pipeline outputs rather than shaping the deliberation that produces them.
arXiv AI
Aug 28
Evaluating human and LLM screening workflows in a conceptually complex scoping review: Recall--workload trade-offs and run-to-run consistency
The study compared human and large language model (LLM) workflows for title‑and‑abstract screening in a complex scoping review. Human reviewers and two GPT‑5.4 file‑batch runs retained 42.2‑45.0% of records with 82.3‑82.9% recall, while Gemini 3.1 achieved the highest recall (83.9%) but retained 56.7% of records. Identical GPT‑5.4 runs showed 91.7% agreement yet differed on 94 records, including 29 verified eligible ones.
arXiv AI
Sep 2
SciTrue: Reliable Scientific Claim Validation with Frontier and Open Language Models at the NTCIR SciClaimEval Task
arXiv:2609.00654v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: We describe the SciTrue team's participation in both subtasks of the NTCIR-19 SciClaimEval task~\cite{sciclaimeval}, which asks systems to verify scien...
arXiv Machine Learning
Jul 10
DeepSWE: Measuring Frontier Coding Agents on Original, Long-Horizon Engineering Tasks
arXiv:2607. 07946v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: DeepSWE is a benchmark of 113 original, long-horizon software engineering tasks for evaluating coding agents.
arXiv AI
Aug 28
Same Model, Different Harness: Different Coding-Agent Results
The paper investigates how altering the harness—specifically the way a coding agent manages context and tool outputs—affects performance when the underlying model and task remain unchanged. Two harness configurations were compared on three coding benchmarks: a control that preserves the full conversation in order, and a treatment that mechanically shortens older tool results to keep the context tight. Across all benchmarks, the treatment increased the mean per‑task fail‑to‑pass fraction and, in some cases, the number of complete solutions, demonstrating that the harness itself can significantly influence a frozen model’s effectiveness.
arXiv AI
Jun 29
CalBrief: A Pilot Diagnostic Benchmark for Evidence-Calibrated Scientific Briefing with Large Language Models
arXiv:2606. 27383v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used as research assistants, yet it remains unclear whether they can calibrate research takeaways to the strength and scope of the supporting evidence.
arXiv AI
4d ago
Do Agent Benchmarks Do What They Say? An Executable-Contract Audit of Tool-Using Agent Environments
arXiv:2609.37315v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Tool-using agents are entering settings where a wrong action carries real cost, and the benchmarks certifying them grade what each simulated tool cal...