arXiv AI

DN-Hypo-Pipeline: An AI-Driven Workflow for Generating Hypotheses using Large Language Models and Scientific Explanations

arXiv:2606. 08532v5 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Modern artificial intelligence excels at prediction but cannot explain.

arXiv Computation and Language
Sep 15

HypoEvolve: Genetic Algorithms Enable Multi-Agent LLMs to Discover Scientific Hypotheses

arXiv:2609.15938v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Scientific agents contribute to hypothesis discovery by synthesizing evidence, assessing proposals, and developing new explanations. Recent systems com...

By Jieyuan Liu, Mengzhou Hu, Jefferson Chen, JungHo Kong, Pratibha Jagannatha, Yiming Gao, Dexter Pratt, Hsin-Yuan Lee, Zhiting Hu, Trey Ideker, Wei Wang, Eric P. Xing, Zhen Wang
arXiv Machine Learning
Jul 1

The Calibration Turn in AI-Assisted Research: A Conceptual and Methodological Framework for Evidence-Licensed Claims

arXiv:2606. 31273v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: AI-assisted research has entered a stage in which the central question is not only whether systems can generate hypotheses, run experiments, or produce manuscripts, but whether their scientific claims are calibrated to the evidence that supports them.

By Hongmin Li
arXiv AI
Sep 2

Can LLMs Discover Scientific Laws in Real and Parallel Worlds?

The paper introduces SCILAWS-BENCH, a benchmark for evaluating large language models (LLMs) on scientific law discovery. It contains 118 problems from 381 scientific papers, covering 291 candidate laws and about 8 million real data points across six disciplines. The benchmark offers two settings: SCILAWS-REAL, where models must propose laws from fixed real observations, and SCILAWS-PARALLEL, where models actively query synthetic worlds to recover hidden laws.

By Yiming Huang, Ziche Liu, Zhuohang Wu, Yiqian Wang, Junxia Cui, Xinkai Zou, Linjun Mao, Nan Huang, Naicheng Yu, Kaijie Zhu, Yue Ma, Kun Zhou, Letian Peng, Jingbo Shang
arXiv AI
Aug 13

Mechanist: AI as a Scientific Instrument for Discovering the Mechanisms of Intelligence

arXiv:2608. 12036v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: AI models have achieved remarkable success across diverse domains, yet the mechanisms underlying their capabilities and the risks they may pose remain poorly understood.

By Mengru Wang, Junfeng Fang, Shuofei Qiao, Zhenqian Xu, Haoming Xu, Haoxiong Wang, Shumin Deng, Linyi Yang, Zhixiang Cui, Xin Xu, Yunzhi Yao, Buqiang Xu, Fei Shen, Haozhe Luo, Yunxiang Wei, Ningyu Zhang, Julian McAuley, Tat Seng Chua, Huajun Chen
arXiv AI
2d ago

Science or Slop?: Benchmarking and Mitigating Scientific Slop in AI-Generated Papers

The paper "Science or Slop?: Benchmarking and Mitigating Scientific Slop in AI-Generated Papers" introduces SciSlopBench, a dataset of 390 AI‑generated papers paired with human‑written counterparts, and defines six measures across Structure, Argument, and Artifacts to detect scientific slop. The authors show that these measures can identify AI papers with 85.9% accuracy and that higher slop correlates with lower ICLR ratings and distinguishes rejected from accepted papers. They also propose SciSlopHarness, a framework that guides a fixed LLM to revise only evidence‑supported sections, reducing the AI‑human gap by 63% without human reference targets.

By Yerim Oh, Young-Jun Lee, Jaewoo Ahn, Gunhee Kim, Dongyeop Kang
arXiv Machine Learning
Aug 27

Emergent Abilities in Large Language Models: A Survey

Emergent Abilities in Large Language Models: A Survey reviews how scaling LLMs leads to previously unseen capabilities such as advanced reasoning, in-context learning, coding, and problem-solving. The paper critically examines definitions, inconsistencies, and the conditions that foster these abilities, including scaling laws, task complexity, pre‑training loss, quantization, and prompting strategies. It also discusses the extension to Large Reasoning Models and highlights safety concerns like deception, manipulation, and reward hacking, calling for improved evaluation and governance.

By Leonardo Berti, Flavio Giorgi, Gjergji Kasneci