arXiv:2605. 18661v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: AI-assisted research is crossing a threshold: fully automated systems can now generate research papers for as little as $15, while long-horizon agents can execute experiments, draft manuscripts, and simulate critique with minimal human input.
By Lingdong Kong, Xian Sun, Wei Chow, Linfeng Li, Kevin Qinghong Lin, Xuan Billy Zhang, Song Wang, Rong Li, Qing Wu, Wei Gao, Yingshuo Wang, Shaoyuan Xie, Jiachen Liu, Leigang Qu, Shijie Li, Lai Xing Ng, Benoit R. Cottereau, Ziwei Liu, Tat-Seng Chua, Wei Tsang Ooi
arXiv:2606. 15497v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: The automation of science is a long-standing ambition in the field of AI.
By Yutaro Yamada, Robert Tjarko Lange, Cong Lu, Chris Lu, Shengran Hu, Jakob Foerster, David Ha, Jeff Clune
ScholarCatalyst is a new benchmark that evaluates how well AI systems can retrieve research papers that inspire new work. The dataset was created by having 184 lead authors of 207 recent computer science papers annotate which earlier papers helped their projects, providing detailed rationales. The benchmark tests retrieval from the literature available at the start of a project, revealing that current agentic search and even advanced models like Claude Fable 5.1 perform only modestly better than simple embedding retrieval.
By Sohyeon Kim, Yoonho Lee, Bo Liu, Dayoon Ko, Rulin Shao, Seungone Kim, Graham Neubig, Pang Wei Koh, Aakanksha Chowdhery, Akari Asai, Omar Khattab, Yejin Choi, Gunhee Kim, Chelsea Finn
arXiv:2607. 13220v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Most AI-for-science systems focus on scaling a single reasoning process through better models, larger context windows, long-horizon agentic execution, or digital co-scientists working with one principal user.
By Sutanay Choudhury, Jeffrey J. Czajka, Lummy M. O. Monteiro, Erin Bredeweg, Jason McDermott, Katherine Wolf, Alex Beliaev, Josh Elmore, Paul Piehowski, Kylee Tate, Yuqian Gao, Aivett Bilbao, Kelly Stratton, Scott Baker, Jaydeep P. Bardhan, Kristin Burnum Johnson, Chris Oehmen, Robert Rallo
AutoResearch is a two‑stage autonomous research system that links Idea Generation with Idea Execution. In the generation phase it blends new research signals with existing domain knowledge, identifies transferable mechanistic insights, and produces grounded, testable research plans through multi‑model generation and cross‑review. The execution phase then decomposes these plans into experiments, iteratively implements and diagnoses them, and uses independent evidence‑based review to accept or revise conclusions, thereby turning ideas into measurable progress while minimizing hallucinations.
By Yiming Ren, Xiang Liu, Qumeng Sun, Xiao Zhang, Jiahao Li, Haoyang Zhang, Junjie Wang
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
The paper introduces SciMuse, an AI system that generates personalized research ideas by combining a knowledge graph of 58 million papers with a large language model. A large-scale evaluation involving over 100 research group leaders across disciplines rated more than 4,400 ideas, yielding modest overall interest scores but showing that 24.9% were rated highly. The study also demonstrates that graph-derived features can predict idea interest and can be used to control idea properties, offering a new methodology for generating and assessing scientific ideas.
By Xuemei Gu, Mario Krenn
PaperDoctor is an agent framework that provides evidence‑grounded, actionable feedback for scientific papers before submission. It evaluates writing, layout, references, code, theory, prior work, and experiments through a three‑layer hierarchical system, linking each critique to specific evidence and revision suggestions. The system selectively rebuilds and reruns experiments to uncover reproducibility gaps, and an interactive interface lets authors explore findings tied to their manuscript.
By Kevin Qinghong Lin, Siyuan Hu, Pan Lu, Yu Chen, Yanzhe Chen, Owen Queen, Yupeng Chen, Jialin Yu, Junchi Yu, Zifeng Ding, Yuanfeng Ji, Sheng Liu, Jindong Gu, Linjie Li, Mike Zheng Shou, Philip Torr, James Zou
arXiv:2608. 10740v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Effective research ideation requires moving beyond a static understanding of prior work to trace how research problems and solutions evolve across the literature.
By Xun Li, Yiying Yang, Pengtao Li, Xiao Yao, Suyu Liu, Xiaoyang Ye, Ziyu Lu, Yuan Yao, Yangning Li, Yinghui Li, Wenhao Jiang
AutoLR is an autonomous harness designed to streamline the iterative research‑and‑engineering cycle for industrial recommender systems, exemplified by NetEase’s gaming‑community app DASHEN. It integrates a multi‑expert council for adversarial review, a deterministic evidence‑weighted selector to allocate trial budgets, and a layered knowledge system that fuses external research with domain‑specific insights and empirical evidence. Large language model agents handle semantic reasoning and code generation, while deterministic controllers maintain control over execution, metrics, guardrails, and state management.
By Qi Zhang, Yanlin Chen, Wenchao Xiao
arXiv:2605.29522v2 Announce Type: replace
Abstract: As scientific literature grows rapidly and research increasingly involves AI agents, automated survey generation has become a key capability for bo...
By Ziyue Yang, Da Ma, Hanqi Li, Zijian Wang, Tiancheng Huang, Zijian Hu, Chenrun Wang, Yunzhe Zhang, Xiaobao Wu, Kai Yu, Lu Chen
arXiv:2608. 05876v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: User requests serve as research specifications for deep research agents, shaping what evidence to seek and how to synthesize it.
By Soojin Yoon, Dongha Lee