arXiv Machine Learning

When May a Model Replace the Experiment? Audits, Licenses, and the Price of Trust in Surrogate-Driven Design

arXiv:2608. 01378v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Design campaigns in chemistry, materials science, and machine learning share a bottleneck: determining how good a candidate truly is requires an expensive evaluation - an experiment, a first-principles simulation, or a full training run.

arXiv AI
Jul 14

LLMs as a Jury: Cross-Model Consensus Can Outperform Process Reward Models for LLM Reasoning

arXiv:2607. 10139v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Selecting the correct answer from a pool of candidate reasoning chains is the engine of test-time scaling, yet the standard selectors each carry a cost: self-consistency inherits the errors of the single model it resamples, and trained reward models need labeled data and transfer poorly off-distribution.

By Ning Liu
arXiv AI
Jun 15

CARE: Controlling LLM-Generated Policies through Auditable Review of Evidence in Scientific Experimentation

arXiv:2606. 14581v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Granting LLMs direct control over costly, irreversible scientific experiments leads to unsafe exploration and unstable performance, but discarding LLM creativity entirely sacrifices significant optimization potential.

By Guanyu Liu, Weiyi Kong, Zeyu Wang, Boer Zhang, Baiqing Li, Peiyu Zhang, Tianyu Shi
arXiv AI
Aug 11

Janus: An Algorithm-Evaluator Co-Evolution Framework for LLM-Driven Discovery under Expensive Evaluation Budgets

arXiv:2608. 08189v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: LLM-driven program discovery relies on rapid evaluator feedback, but many scientific and engineering tasks require high-fidelity simulations, hardware execution, or physical experiments, making each evaluation expensive.

By Ximeng Liu, Qianlong Wang, Yingming Mao, Annan Li, Yatao Li, Shizhen Zhao, Jianmin Wu, Dawei Yin, Dou Shen