arXiv:2606. 04579v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: While Process Reward Models (PRMs) have achieved remarkable success in mathematical reasoning, their application in complex scientific domains-such as biology, chemistry, and physics remains largely unexplored.
By Xiangyu Zhao, Hengyuan Zhao, Yiheng Wang, Wanghan Xu, Yuhao Zhou, Qinglong Cao, Zhiwang Zhou, Lei Bai, Wenlong Zhang, Xiao-Ming Wu
The paper investigates whether domain-specific fine‑tuning benefits open‑ended scientific reasoning in astronomy. Using a curated 300‑question QA benchmark from 2017–2026 Olympiad‑style materials, the authors compare open‑weight, API‑served general‑purpose, multimodal, and astronomy‑specialized language models. Results show that strong general‑purpose models set the highest correctness baseline, but variations in metric agreement, judge sensitivity, benchmark composition, and modality suggest that domain specialization is task‑ and deployment‑dependent and that domain‑specific evaluation is crucial for scientific workflows.
By Vanessa Lama, Sanjay Das, Emily Herron, Yuan-Sen Ting, Tijmen de Haan, Junqi Yin, Tirthankar Ghosal, Feiyi Wang
SciWalker is a framework that automatically synthesizes scientific coding problems by sampling operator chains from scientific library interfaces and using execution feedback to refine generated problem statements, solutions, and tests. It produces 8,178 high‑quality problems across five scientific domains and 32 subdomains, and training a large language model with these problems improves its scientific coding accuracy by nearly 10 percentage points. The approach combines structured workflow composition with verification and quality review to enable scalable, scientifically grounded task generation.
By Chenxi Li, Wenxuan Zeng, Yun Luo, Fangchen Yu, Peng Ye, Yu Cheng, Jun Zhang
arXiv:2606. 13020v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Three paradigmatic forms of inference recur across scientific reasoning: deduction, induction, and causal abduction.
By Pierre Beckmann, Marco Valentino, Andre Freitas
arXiv:2603.00889v2 Announce Type: replace-cross
Abstract: Large Language Models (LLMs) have exhibited remarkable reasoning capabilities, largely enabled by supervised fine-tuning (SFT)- and reinforce...
By Xinyu Zhu, Yihao Feng, Yanchao Sun, Xianzhi Du, Pingzhi Li, Olli Saarikivi, Yun Zhu, Yu Meng
arXiv:2607. 18091v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Structural fidelity is essential to scientific methodology diagrams.
By Yuxuan Luo, Peng Zhang, Xinjie Zhang, Xun Guo, Zhouhui Lian, Yan Lu
The paper presents the first large‑scale benchmark for uncertainty quantification (UQ) calibration in long‑form scientific question answering, evaluating four UQ methods on 685,000 responses from up to 20 large language models across seven datasets. It shows that instruction tuning leads to token‑level probability polarization, undermining token‑level uncertainty signals, while reasoning model families differ in how they handle this effect. Only semantic consistency—consistency of the final answer—provides well‑calibrated outputs, demonstrating that semantic calibration remains robust in multi‑step, dependency‑rich reasoning.
By Philip M\"uller, Nicholas Popovi\v{c}, Michael F\"arber, Peter Steinbach
arXiv:2609.38409v1 Announce Type: new
Abstract: Recent progress in large language model reasoning has been driven by benchmarks and reinforcement learning environments with automatically verifiable r...
By \.Ibrahim Ethem Deveci, Funda Tan \c{C}al{\i}k, Bar{\i}\c{s} Deniz Sa\u{g}lam, Duygu Ataman
arXiv:2606.15872v2 Announce Type: replace
Abstract: Frontier scientific reasoning remains a major challenge for large language models (LLMs), where even the strongest commercial systems fall short of...
By Jingru Guo, Xiangyuan Xue, Lian Zhang, Wanghan Xu, Siki Chen, Philip Torr, Wanli Ouyang, Lei Bai, Zhenfei Yin
The paper introduces a neuro‑symbolic framework for scientific reasoning that separates symbolic validity and semantic groundedness. A deterministic symbolic verifier acts as a hard filter to guarantee syntactic and arithmetic correctness, while a Process Reward Model (PRM) is trained on verifier‑accepted steps to assess contextual grounding. The authors propose Counterfactual Symbolic Perturbation (CSP) to generate hard negative examples that pass the verifier but are logically flawed, enabling efficient PRM training and a verifier‑first constrained search at inference.
By Yuxin Zi, Cong Xu, Suparna Bhattacharya, Martin Foltin, Amit Sheth
arXiv:2601.20055v3 Announce Type: replace-cross
Abstract: Despite the syntactic fluency of Large Language Models (LLMs), ensuring their logical correctness in high-stakes domains remains a fundamenta...
By Vikash Singh, Darion Cassel, Nathaniel Weir, Nick Feng, Sam Bayless
Route-Verify-Vote (RVV) is a framework that applies procedure-conditioned self-consistency to mixed-domain reasoning without updating model parameters. It selects a domain-specific reasoning procedure, verifies each option against constraints, and aggregates answer sets, allocating extra samples to questions with close vote margins. On the SCoRE 2026 benchmark, RVV achieves 74.6% exact-set accuracy, improving to 77.3% with adaptive sampling and 79.4% when combining models on selected domain routes, earning second place among participants.
By Xinchen Xiao