arXiv:2606. 04751v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed as autonomous agents in scientific tasks.
Defeasible reasoning is a type of reasoning where inferences are drawn from plausible current evidence, but can be retracted upon the introduction of newer evidence. Although recent studies have exami...
arXiv:2608.30413v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Defeasible reasoning is a type of reasoning where inferences are drawn from plausible current evidence, but can be retracted upon the introduction of n...
arXiv:2607. 12733v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) excel at pattern recognition and text generation, but their capacity for abductive inference - inferring latent hypotheses that explain observed behavior - remains poorly understood.
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.
arXiv:2606. 11337v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Scientific AI agents increasingly retrieve evidence, reason across sources, and synthesize conclusions used in consequential decisions.
arXiv:2609.01526v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Scientific agents must learn not only how to reason, but also what to believe. However, existing LLM agents typically express scientific hypotheses in...
The paper proposes a distributional theory explaining how large language models (LLMs) incorporate external evidence into their decision-making process. It identifies three key predictions: (1) evidence is more persuasive when it aligns with the model’s prior beliefs, (2) models more readily accept errors from their own internal processes than from external sources, and (3) the same evidence can improve weaker models while harming stronger ones. Extensive experiments across ten million trials, twelve LLMs from four families, and eight domains—including quantum mechanics, physics, genetics, and molecular biology—confirm these predictions and reveal that evidence integration occurs late in the network as a structured sequence of steps rather than through a simple trust metric.
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.
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.
arXiv:2608.30214v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Scientific reasoning remains challenging for open-source models, largely due to the lack of high-quality scientific reasoning data. Existing datasets a...
LiveMathematicianBench is a dynamic multiple‑choice benchmark for research‑level mathematical reasoning, built from recent arXiv papers published after model training cutoffs. It introduces a thirteen‑category logical taxonomy of theorem types and uses a proof‑sketch‑guided distractor pipeline to create plausible but invalid answer choices, enhancing sensitivity to genuine reasoning. Evaluation shows current large language models perform poorly, with the best model scoring 43.5% overall and only 17.6% under substitution‑resistant conditions, indicating the benchmark’s difficulty and realism.
arXiv:2605.26087v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Frontier LLMs now perform strongly across a wide range of physics evaluations, but it is hard to disentangle genuine reasoning from recall of...