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:2606. 02632v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Modern Machine Learning (ML) and Artificial Intelligence (AI) models, especially large language models (LLMs), are increasingly used to generate scientific hypotheses and mechanistic explanations from observational data.
By Tyler H. McCormick
arXiv:2608. 13558v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Recent advances in foundation models have enabled AI scientists to automate increasingly complete research workflows, from hypothesis generation and code execution to manuscript preparation.
By Bobo Li, Hao Fei, Tianjie Ju, Mong-Li Lee, Wynne Hsu
arXiv:2606. 04751v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed as autonomous agents in scientific tasks.
By Leonardo Bertolazzi, Katya Tentori, Raffaella Bernardi
arXiv:2607. 04505v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: We advance the hypothesis that human mathematical reasoning, constrained by both the undecidability and the computational intractability of even modest logical fragments, relies fundamentally on pattern matching from domains external to pure deduction.
By Charanjit S. Jutla, Vimal Sharma
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: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
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:2607. 09195v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language model (LLM) agents are increasingly expected to play a central role in AI-driven scientific discovery.
By Izumi Takahara, Teruyasu Mizoguchi
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
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
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