The paper introduces a retrieval‑augmented multi‑agent framework that automatically generates instance‑specific evaluation rubrics for medical language models. By retrieving authoritative medical evidence, decomposing it into atomic facts, and combining these with user interaction constraints, the system produces fine‑grained criteria that outperform GPT‑4o on HealthBench and LLMEval‑Med. The generated rubrics also guide response refinement, improving medical LLM output quality by 9.2%.
By Yinzhu Chen, Abdine Maiga, Hossein A. Rahmani, Emine Yilmaz
arXiv:2512. 11682v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Therapeutic decision-making in clinical medicine constitutes a high-stakes domain in which AI guidance interacts with complex interactions among patient characteristics, disease processes, and pharmacological agents.
By Tim Cofala, Christian Kalfar, Jingge Xiao, Johanna Schrader, Michelle Tang, Wolfgang Nejdl
ClinAgent is a conversational system that uses a ReAct-based LLM agent to retrieve and synthesize clinical trial information from multiple sources such as ClinicalTrials.gov, PubMed, and a local dataset. The agent iteratively reasons over user queries, selects appropriate tools, and refines its actions to provide grounded, up-to-date responses in natural language across multi-turn interactions. Evaluation across three phases shows that DeepSeek (thinking mode) excels in planning quality while Gemini 3.0 Flash delivers the highest overall performance and expert ratings, demonstrating the promise of agentic AI for improving clinical trial data access.
By Antonino Vaccarella, Riccardo Cantini, Domenico Talia, Paolo Trunfio, Marianna Talia, Rosamaria Lappano, Marcello Maggiolini
arXiv:2607. 05456v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: While recent advances in large language models have enabled end-to-end automated manuscript generation, existing systems suffer from three critical deficiencies: (i) generated claims are not deterministically grounded in verifiable literature, (ii) experimental results are frequently fabricated rather than executed, and (iii) there exists no standardized, multi-dimensional framework to assess whether AI-generated manuscripts meet the quality and rigor required for real-world publication.
By Ramsha Kamran, Maheera Amjad, Zartasha Mustansar, Arsalan Shaukat, Salma Sherbaz, Muhammad U. S. Khan
arXiv:2602.00663v3 Announce Type: replace
Abstract: Optimizing molecules to achieve desired properties is a central bottleneck across the chemical sciences, particularly in the pharmaceutical industr...
By Fabian P. Kr\"uger, Andrea Hunklinger, Adrian Wolny, Tim J. Adler, Igor Tetko, Santiago David Villalba
arXiv:2606. 02109v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Enterprise AI systems that translate natural language into SQL queries and orchestrate multi-step agentic reasoning pipelines require evaluation approaches fundamentally different from academic benchmarks.
By Shannon Serrao, Soumitra Chatterjee, Dorina Strori, Abhishek Sharma, Nathan Miller
arXiv:2606. 19245v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Artificial intelligence (AI) agents promise to accelerate drug discovery by compressing interpretation and decision-making loops, but practical deployment requires trusted evaluation on realistic program decisions.
By Hannah Le, Ramesh Ramasamy, Alex Urrutia, Mahsa Yazdani, Tim Proctor, Kenny Workman
arXiv:2509. 23426v3 Announce Type: replace Abstract: AI scientists are emerging computational systems that serve as collaborative partners in discovery.
By Shanghua Gao, Richard Zhu, Pengwei Sui, Zhenglun Kong, Sufian Aldogom, Yepeng Huang, Ayush Noori, Reza Shamji, Krishna Parvataneni, Theodoros Tsiligkaridis, Marinka Zitnik
arXiv:2602. 02905v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Autonomous agents powered by large language models (LLMs) promise to accelerate scientific discovery end-to-end, but rigorously evaluating their capacity for verifiable discovery remains a central challenge.
By Zhen Wang, Fan Bai, Zhongyan Luo, Jinyan Su, Kaiser Sun, Xinle Yu, Jieyuan Liu, Kun Zhou, Claire Cardie, Mark Dredze, Zhiting Hu, Eric P. Xing
PADM'E is a method for synthesizing preference‑aligned data to meta‑evaluate language‑model (LM) evaluators of agentic behaviors. It reframes meta‑evaluation as a preference judgment problem, generating criterion‑based data with small LMs and no human involvement. In a prototype, PADM'E produced 1,000 samples across four domains and three criteria, and human validation showed agreement with human judgment rising from 73% to 85% compared to a naive baseline.
By Cheng Chang, Yining Mao, Peng Qi
arXiv:2606. 30887v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language models show promise for mental health support, yet therapeutic quality improves only when evaluation functions as an actionable control signal rather than a passive metric.
By Mizanur Rahman, Abeer Badawi, Elahe Rahimi, Laleh Seyyed-Kalantari, Frank Rudzicz, Enamul Hoque, Elham Dolatabadi
arXiv:2608.21374v1 Announce Type: new
Abstract: Literature reviews are essential to scientific progress, but rigorously evaluating automatically generated reviews remains difficult because many aspec...
By Ruotong Zhao, Zhiyu Chen, Xurui Liu, Haidong Xue, Dong Liang, Jigao Fu, Wu YanBiao, Yuanyi Zhen, Fengli Xu, Yong Li