arXiv AI

Ideation Arena: Evaluating LLM Generated Research Ideas with Battle-style Human Expert Assessment

Ideation Arena is a battle-style platform that evaluates research ideas generated by large language models (LLMs) and research agents through pairwise human assessment. The system builds shared literature contexts, collects over 6,000 double-blind comparisons from 105 computer science researchers, and constructs an Elo rating leaderboard to rank proposal-stage expert preferences. It also introduces Ideation Arena Eval, a benchmark to test whether automated evaluators align with human preferences, finding that current LLM judges achieve at best 72.56% Soft Accuracy on overall quality.

arXiv AI
3d ago

Sci$\Pi$vot: Benchmarking Principal-Investigator Judgment at Pivotal Moments of Scientific AutoResearch Agents

Sciπvot is a 248‑case benchmark that evaluates how well large language model (LLM) agents perform scientific judgment during autonomous research. The benchmark is built from six months of real‑world experiments where senior researchers ran LLM agents on 26 projects across six scientific fields and repeatedly corrected the agents’ decisions. In each case, the agent must choose between its original plan and a human‑corrected alternative using only the project record available before the correction, allowing a direct comparison of LLM and human performance under varying reasoning effort and record access.

By Youran Sun, Xingyu Ren, Chugang Yi, Kejia Zhang, Di Wu, Yingkang Cao, Allen Zhou, Jianping Ye, Suying Liu, Jiaxuan Guo, Jianda Du, Weicheng Ye, Kecheng Liu, Hefan Zhang, Haixin Wang, Jie Xiao, Eric Yang, Haizhao Yang
arXiv Machine Learning
Jul 17

Idea2Plan: Exploring AI-Powered Research Planning

arXiv:2510. 24891v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated significant potential to accelerate scientific discovery as valuable tools for analyzing data, generating hypotheses, and supporting innovative approaches in various scientific fields.

By Jin Huang, Silviu Cucerzan, Sujay Kumar Jauhar, Ryen W. White
arXiv AI
Jun 8

Act As a Real Researcher: A Suite of Benchmarks Evaluating Frontier LLMs and Agentic Harnesses in Research Lifecycle

arXiv:2606. 07462v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: As foundation models advance and agent scaffolding becomes increasingly sophisticated, agents have demonstrated remarkable proficiency in complex, long-horizon coding tasks and even autonomous experiment execution.

By Jiayu Wang, Weijiang Lv, Bowen Fu, Jing Fu, Jiayi Song, Lingyu Zhang, Lanxuan Xue, Luodi Chen, Zepeng Xin, Kaiyu Li, Xiangyong Cao
arXiv AI
Sep 7

AutoLR: Automating the Path from Research to Launch Review in Industrial Recommender Systems

AutoLR is an autonomous harness designed to streamline the iterative research‑and‑engineering cycle for industrial recommender systems, exemplified by NetEase’s gaming‑community app DASHEN. It integrates a multi‑expert council for adversarial review, a deterministic evidence‑weighted selector to allocate trial budgets, and a layered knowledge system that fuses external research with domain‑specific insights and empirical evidence. Large language model agents handle semantic reasoning and code generation, while deterministic controllers maintain control over execution, metrics, guardrails, and state management.

By Qi Zhang, Yanlin Chen, Wenchao Xiao
arXiv AI
Aug 19

Do LLMs Know a Good Hypothesis When They See One? Logit-Based Energy Scoring Outperforms Prompted LLM-as-Judge for Scientific Hypothesis Ranking

The paper investigates whether large language models (LLMs) can reliably assess scientific hypotheses by using a logit-based energy scoring method that leverages the model’s intrinsic confidence. Across 1,323 papers in 12 disciplines, this intrinsic scoring achieved a 33.0% Hit@1 rate, outperforming a prompted listwise ranking approach that scored 16.6%. The best result, a 1‑billion‑parameter model with logit-based energy scoring, reached 53.1% Hit@1, suggesting that confidence‑based evaluation could improve trustworthy AI‑enabled scientific discovery.

By Swati Rajwal, Sanjay Das, Tirthankar Ghosal
arXiv Computation and Language
Aug 27

IDEAlign: Comparing Ideas of Large Language Models to Domain Expert

IDEAlign introduces a new protocol for evaluating the similarity of large language model (LLM) annotations to expert judgments. It uses pick‑the‑odd‑one‑out tasks to capture expert similarity and benchmarks various similarity methods—including text embeddings, topic models, and LLM-as-a-judge—against these human ratings. Applied to educational datasets, the study finds that most metrics miss nuanced expert dimensions, with LLM-as-a-judge performing best yet still insufficient for full expert alignment.

By Hyunji Nam, Lucia Langlois, James Malamut, Mei Tan, Dorottya Demszky
arXiv AI
4d ago

Interaction-as-a-Judge

arXiv:2610.17895v2 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Coding agents are tasked with producing sophisticated interactive applications such as websites, desktop applications, and games. While humans assess...

By Wayne Chi, I-Hung Hsu, Li Chen, Wei-Lin Chiang, Ion Stoica, Anastasios Nikolas Angelopoulos, Ameet Talwalkar, Chris Donahue, Cho-Jui Hsieh
arXiv AI
Aug 5

AgentPanel: Toward a New Paradigm for Human--AI Collaboration in Exploring Scientific Questions

arXiv:2608. 03283v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Identifying promising scientific ideas remains an important challenge in research practice.

By Zhiyao Cui, Qianyi Wang, Haoyang Yan, Yiqun Zhang, Siyue Ren, Hangfan Zhang, Zelin Tan, Hao Li, Chunjiang Mu, Dexian Cai, Shao Zhang, Chen Zhang, Meng Li, Jianan Chai, Yuting Fan, Zichao Ye, Xiaolei Yang, Xinyao Lu, Yuyang Yu, Wenjie Lou, Xiaosong Wang, Fenghua Ling, Shiyang Feng, Mao Su, Qiaosheng Zhang, Bo Zhang, Yang Chen, Lei Bai, Shuyue Hu