The paper introduces OmicsBench, a new reasoning benchmark for multi‑omics sequences that includes 1,160 expert‑validated questions across DNA regulation, RNA processing, and protein function tasks, requiring traceable evidence chains. Evaluation of 17 large language models shows that scientific LLMs, while more accurate in classification, often lack valid evidence, suggesting shortcut learning. To address this, the authors propose tool‑augmented on‑policy distillation (TA‑OPD), a post‑training method that improves both evidence grounding and predictive performance across five Qwen3.5 models of varying sizes.
By Jie Ying, Zhefan Wang, Zihong Chen, Zhengqing Li, Jinzhe Li, Gang Li, Jian Liu, Fang Hu, Tao Luo, Zhonghang Yuan, Wanli Ouyang, Stan Z. Li, Fan Yang, Nanqing Dong
arXiv:2606. 01042v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Perturbation experiments are central to understanding cellular mechanisms, but remain costly and sparse, motivating prediction of gene expression responses for unobserved conditions.
By Xinyu Yuan, Xixian Liu, Jianan Zhao, Yashi Zhang, Hongyu Guo, Jian Tang
The paper introduces EDB-Bio, a benchmark of 96,000 episodes drawn from real biological studies—drug‑perturbation transcriptomics, CRISPR screens, and GWAS—to test whether language models can weigh empirical evidence and predict hypothesis truth. Initial results show that both open‑weight and frontier models are systematically underconfident, matching a trivial base‑rate forecaster in Brier score, but post‑training with proper scoring rules improves calibration and discrimination. In a downstream experiment‑selection task, a calibrated model (Ibis0) outperforms the best frontier model by 2.5×, and Bayes‑factor analysis reveals how models update beliefs, align with expert relevance judgments, and expose biases.
By Conor Igoe, Gabriel Grand, Zane Koch, Albert Bou, Eli Moss, Michaela M. Hinks, Samuel G. Rodriques, Andrew White, Siddharth Narayanan
arXiv:2608. 05982v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Inadequate target--disease linkage accounts for 40--50\% of Phase~II efficacy failures, so anticipating which programmes will advance would let sponsors back the hypotheses most likely to reach patients.
By Pui Chung Siu, Claudia Cabrera, Mani Mudaliar, Arkaitz Zubiaga
Hakken is a domain‑agnostic system that predicts and explains future scientific discoveries by combining transformer‑based models trained on temporal knowledge graphs with large language model semantic knowledge. It identifies novel relationships between scientific concepts that extend beyond the deductive hull of existing knowledge and provides explanations to help scientists assess these predictions. In the biomedical domain, Hakken set a new benchmark for time‑aware multi‑label relation prediction, generated 1.5 million high‑confidence hypotheses about aging, and experimentally confirmed two predictions that revealed previously undocumented interactions relevant to drug discovery.
By Tarek R. Besold, Uchenna Akujuobi, Pablo Sanchez, Alessandra Toniato, Kana Maruyama, Jihun Choi, Samy Badreddine, Frederick Gifford, Daniel Evans-Yamamoto, Sucheendra K. Palaniappan, Miquel Ferrer, Kae Nagano, Iris Rossell, Tom Joy, Hatem ElShazly, Chrysa Iliopoulou, Christoph Wehner, Thiviyan Thanapalasingam, Susana Nunes, Pedro G. Cotovio, Peter Wurman, Peter Stone, Hiroaki Kitano, Michael Spranger
The paper introduces BAR, a Budget‑Aware LLM Reasoning framework that enhances post‑discharge risk prediction by integrating external medical knowledge graphs (KGs). BAR refines KGs into disease‑specific evidence graphs with support scores and provenance, then uses an LLM to plan, navigate, and verify evidence within a patient‑specific budget. Experiments on MIMIC‑III and MIMIC‑IV across eight diseases show BAR improves AUPRC by 3.4 points, raises citation precision from 59.8% to 77.9%, and uses only 62‑65% of the allotted budget.
By Chen Chen, Dongjie Wang, Mei Liu, Zijun Yao
arXiv:2606. 08532v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: A scientific hypothesis is the first step in research and undergoes experimental validation, yet it also reflects a deep understanding of and reasoning about scientific phenomena.
By Lei Lin, Ronghao Wang, Chunbao Zhou, Jue Wang, Yangang Wang
arXiv:2609.06779v1 Announce Type: cross
Abstract: Drug repurposing aims to identify new therapeutic uses for existing compounds and, compared with de novo drug discovery, offers a faster and more cos...
By Zijie Liu, Hongxuan Li, Zhen Tan, Jinhao Duan, Baixiang Huang, Zunpeng Liu, Kai Shu, Tianlong Chen
arXiv:2607. 26397v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Enzyme function prediction is a hierarchical, knowledge-intensive form of protein function classification.
By Linyu Li, Zhi Jin, Yichi Zhang, Dongming Jin, Yuanpeng He, Huanyao Zhang, Xuan Zhang, Gadeng Luosang, Nyima Tashi
The study evaluates whether biological reasoning models actually use their biological inputs by testing six models on DNA, protein, and single‑cell tasks. By perturbing one biological input while keeping others fixed, the authors find that many models (e.g., Evo2, ESM3, BioReason, BioReason‑Pro) rely primarily on textual information, with minimal impact from the biological representations. In contrast, models like ChatNT, Prot2Text‑V2, CellWhisperer, and Cell2Sentence‑Scale show greater dependence on their biological inputs, yet overall accuracy gains do not consistently reflect increased biological input contribution.
By Ada Fang, Nikitha Thoduguli, Lukas Fesser, Hanlin Zhang, Sham M. Kakade, Marinka Zitnik
Scientific knowledge graphs organize entities and relations extracted from scientific literature, but they remain inherently incomplete. Missing typed links in such graphs can therefore represent plau...
EvidenceNet is a disease‑specific dataset that transforms full‑text biomedical literature into structured evidence records and graph representations, preserving study design, provenance, and quantitative support. Using an LLM‑assisted pipeline, it extracts experimentally grounded findings, normalizes entities, scores evidence quality, and links related records via typed semantic relations. The released subsets—EvidenceNet‑HCC and EvidenceNet‑CRC—contain thousands of evidence records and richly connected graphs, with high extraction and relation‑type accuracy, enabling retrieval‑augmented question answering and graph‑based tasks such as link prediction and target prioritization.
By Chang Zong, Jinyu Chen, Sicheng Lv, Si-tu Xue, Huilin Zheng, Jian Wan, Lei Zhang