The paper introduces a new human‑AI collaboration paradigm for mathematical discovery, shifting from selecting individual problems to exploring broad research directions. It presents the Find, Attempt, and Recommend (FAR) pipeline, which automatically searches a literature corpus, filters candidate conjectures, and surfaces promising resolutions for expert review. In a combinatorics pilot, FAR processed over 5,000 papers, identified thousands of open conjectures, and ultimately highlighted 77 items that led to new discoveries.
By Zeyu Zheng, Shengtong Zhang, Jeremy Avigad, Prasad Tetali, Sean Welleck
The paper introduces SGHA, a fully automated system that discovers research problems by structuring scientific literature into evidence-linked objects and a typed evidence graph. SGHA operates entirely on a local 9B open‑weight language model, avoiding proprietary frontier‑model APIs, and outputs traceable research‑problem families with assumptions, objectives, success criteria, and ambiguities. Comparative experiments in five machine‑learning domains show that SGHA’s corpus‑first, evidence‑constrained approach yields inspectable research‑problem formulation without relying on external models.
By Sarvesh Gharat, Junpei Komiyama
arXiv:2609.15973v1 Announce Type: new
Abstract: Foundation models have progressed from learning and reasoning over existing knowledge, to increasingly learning through action, tool use, and outcome f...
By Ling Yang, Zhenfei Yin, Yingcheng Wu
arXiv:2602. 06448v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Large Language Model (LLM)-based scientific agents have accelerated scientific discovery, yet they often suffer from significant inefficiencies due to adherence to fixed initial priors.
By Yingming Pu, Tao Lin, Hongyu Chen
The paper introduces HorizonMath, a benchmark of 113 largely unsolved mathematical problems across eight domains, paired with an open-source framework for automated verification. It focuses on the generator‑verifier gap, targeting problems that are hard to discover but easy to verify computationally, thereby avoiding costly formal proof verification or manual review. Using this framework, the authors found six novel solutions—three each from GPT‑5.4 Pro and GPT‑5.6 Sol—demonstrating that current models can contribute to mathematical research, while most state‑of‑the‑art models score below 10%.
By Erik Y. Wang, Sumeet R. Motwani, James V. Roggeveen, Eliot Hodges, Dulhan Jayalath, Charles London, Kalyan Ramakrishnan, Jakob Foerster, Cheng Zhang, Flaviu Cipcigan, Philip Torr, Alessandro Abate
The paper introduces ScientistTwo, a fully autonomous multi‑agent framework that takes a scientific problem, establishes baselines, generates hypotheses, and coordinates specialized agents to conduct an end‑to‑end discovery cycle without human intervention. It rigorously tests and refines its methods through automated experiments, ablation studies, and a closed‑loop peer‑review engine. Benchmarking against top conferences (ICLR, ICML, NeurIPS) shows that ScientistTwo produces expert‑level, publishable papers and codebases that outperform human state‑of‑the‑art models and receive higher review ratings under automated AI review.
By Jaehyun Nam, Jinsung Yoon, Yanzhou Pan, Yubo Wang, Rui Meng, Parthasarathy Ranganathan, Tomas Pfister
arXiv:2604. 19341v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Scientific discovery often requires many cycles of proposing, testing, and refining candidate solutions.
By Haotian Ye, Haowei Lin, Jingyi Tang, Yizhen Luo, Rahul Thapa, Caiyin Yang, Chang Su, Rui Yang, Ruihua Liu, Rundao Li, Zeyu Li, Pengwei Sun, Chong Gao, Dachao Ding, Guangrong He, Miaolei Zhang, Lina Sun, Wenyang Wang, Yuchen Zhong, Zhuohao Shen, Puheng Li, Pan Lu, Bianxiao Cui, Di He, Jianzhu Ma, Junfeng Li, Hexi Baoyin, Yejin Choi, Stefano Ermon, Xiaowen Chu, Tongyang Li, Yuzhi Xu, James Zou
arXiv:2606. 26359v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Ray Kurzweil described a thesis of accelerating returns, which is the most influential narratives in discussions of technological progress.
By Guojun Liao (Department of Mathematics, The University of Texas at Arlington)
arXiv:2609.07611v1 Announce Type: new
Abstract: Scientific ideation is the capacity to formulate novel and testable hypotheses from scientific evidence, and autonomous AI scientists depend on it. Exi...
By Yunxiang Mo, Tianshi Zheng, Yisen Gao, Rui Wang, Newt Nguyen Kim Hue Nam, Kelvin Kiu Wai Tam, Jiaxin Bai, Yangqiu Song, Ginny Wong, Simon See
arXiv:2607. 01131v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Autonomous scientific discovery systems offer the potential to accelerate research by automating the process of hypothesis generation and validation.
By Bingchen Zhao, Sara Beery, Oisin Mac Aodha
The paper introduces R3Con, a framework that applies principled design rules—derived from cognitive relevance theory—to construct effective context representations for large-scale reasoning tasks. By systematically organizing vast, heterogeneous information into manageable structures, R3Con outperforms nine state‑of‑the‑art baselines on two large‑document reasoning benchmarks, achieving up to 20 percentage points higher accuracy. Notably, R3Con enables smaller models (4B–9B) to surpass larger 35B models and even Claude Code, demonstrating that principled context representation can reduce dependence on model scale.
By Michael Theologitis, Dean Light, Shuyue Stella Li, Benjamin Newman, Yulia Tsvetkov, Dan Suciu
arXiv:2606. 26728v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Scientific discovery is fundamentally an optimization problem, defined by a vast "state space" of theories and experiments, and an evaluation criterion based on quality, novelty, and validity.
By Yuan-Hang Zhang, Chesson Sipling, Massimiliano Di Ventra