arXiv:2606. 17529v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Scientific machine-learning (SciML) surrogates approximate expensive simulations, but exact expected outputs for arbitrary inputs are unavailable (the oracle problem).
By Meng Li, Xiaohua Yang, Jie Liu, Shiyu Yan
arXiv:2607. 07863v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: In physically dominated machining processes, experimental datasets are small, expensive, and material-specific; in this regime, data curation, evaluation design, and the form of physics integration can matter as much as the learning algorithm.
By Sarah Grewe, J\"org Frochte
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
arXiv:2604. 16706v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Automated evaluation of tool-using large language model (LLM) agents is widely assumed to be reliable, yet this assumption is rarely validated against human annotation.
By Bhaskar Gurram
arXiv:2607. 02329v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Autonomous-research agents have demonstrated end-to-end LLM automation in machine-learning sandboxes where execution provides calibration.
By Haonan Huang
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.
By Tanush Swaminathan, Runmin Jiang, Letian Zhang, Min Xu
arXiv:2607. 05682v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: LLM systems for scientific discovery increasingly assist with ideation, literature synthesis, experiment planning, and report generation, but the first research question they propose can remain difficult to audit: it may sound plausible without exposing the mechanism, falsifier, or assumption that a scientist should inspect.
By Yufeng Wang
arXiv:2608. 05235v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Research agents increasingly conduct multi-round machine-learning experiments in industrial recommendation settings and retain the resulting trajectories to guide later decisions.
By Zijie Zhuang, Changxin Lao, Pengbo Xu, Hanwen Xu, Ruochen Yang, Yingzhi He, Peng Zhang, Jiangxia Cao, Yusheng Huang, Guohong Mu, Jian Liang, Ruiming Tang, Shuang Yang, Zhaojie Liu, Wenwu Ou, Kun Gai
arXiv:2604. 12198v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Autonomous LLM agents now produce complete research artifacts in machine-learning sandboxes, but real computational physics is harder: experiments are first-principles calculations against re-runnable physical ground truth, and meaningful new work almost always builds on a key existing paper.
By Haonan Huang
arXiv:2607. 02134v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Scientific machine learning papers typically make computational claims, e.
By Atharva Hans, Ilias Bilionis
Predicting the answer to interventional ``what if'' questions --- the outcome of an action never taken --- requires a \emph{mechanistic}, causal model, not a curve fit; and learning such a model requires \emph{experiments}, because passive data leaves its mechanisms unidentified. Experiments are expensive, so the central problem is \emph{data efficiency}.
arXiv:2607. 17100v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: An AI research agent can improve the score it sees without finding a modelling change that works on new materials.
By Jingjie Ning, Xiaochuan Li, Shanshan Zhong, Ji Zeng, Guolin Ke