arXiv:2606. 24894v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Large language models have shown strong fluency in scientific writing, yet the evaluation of related work generation (RWG) remains limited.
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...
The paper investigates how large language models can extract contextualized data from scientific literature. It presents four workflows: expert‑written prompts, self‑generated prompts, autonomous literature discovery, and dataset creation from guidelines. While models perform well with prompts, they struggle with context, hallucinate references, and still need human oversight for final validation.
SurveyGraph introduces a framework that uses a Methods‑Entity Knowledge Graph (MEKG) to encode relationships such as follow‑on, competition, and shared‑resource links between research methods. The graph enables core‑paper discovery, hybrid outlining, and evidence‑gated narrative synthesis, outperforming flat lexical baselines in recall and achieving strong citation support and semantic edge validation. The study demonstrates MEKG’s effectiveness through controlled benchmarks, diagnostic tests, and human adjudication, positioning it as an auditable structural layer for survey generation.
The paper evaluates browser-based large language models (LLMs) for extracting detailed, contextualized data from scientific papers. It presents four workflows: (1) expert-curated prompts yield good extraction but struggle with nuance; (2) LLMs can generate effective prompts from simple instructions; (3) autonomous literature discovery is challenging, with missing or hallucinated references; (4) LLMs can build new datasets from guidelines that align closely with human experts, yet still need human oversight. The study outlines a practical, auditable workflow where experts set standards, models cross-check extractions, and researchers resolve disputes, enabling scalable scientific data curation.
Optimist Deep Research is an open‑source agent that conducts literature research as an iterative, state‑centric process. It breaks a research question into a tree of subquestions, uses search intents to query multiple scholarly databases, and merges results into a provenance‑preserving document registry. The agent iteratively expands the registry via citation snowballing, evaluates evidence, and refines the research plan through a critic that can add, split, rephrase, deprioritize, or close subquestions, ultimately producing a report with every citation linked to a retrieved document.
arXiv:2601.17020v3 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: With the rising popularity of interdisciplinary work and increasing institutional incentives in this direction, there is a growing need to un...
arXiv:2609.01432v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Scientific citations carry rhetorical intent. Scholars may cite prior work positively (supporting), negatively (contrasting), or neutrally (mentionin...
arXiv:2605.30947v4 Announce Type: replace Abstract: LLM-based research agents have advanced rapidly in science and engineering, where research is organized around executable experiments, code, and qu...
DeepWeaver addresses the evidence synthesis gap in open‑ended question answering by weaving noisy retrieved evidence into comprehensive answers. It introduces Thought Block Chains (TBCs) that organize claims, key information, and citations, allowing the system to revise and expand evidence before final generation. Evaluations on LoQA and DeepResearch Bench show improved content sufficiency, citation grounding, and detail preservation across multiple LLMs.
SurveyGraph introduces a framework that uses a Methods-Entity Knowledge Graph (MEKG) to generate academic surveys, addressing limitations of flat document retrieval by encoding method-level follow‑on, competition, and shared‑resource relations. The graph enables core‑paper discovery, retrieval, hybrid outlining, and evidence‑gated narrative synthesis, and is evaluated on retrieval, semantic edges, citation grounding, coverage, and generation components. Experiments show MEKG‑anchored fusion balances recall and structural density, graph‑aware retrieval nearly doubles recall over flat baselines, and a semantic evidence gate achieves an AUC of 0.75, with audits indicating strong citation support and relation accuracy.
DeepWeaver is a framework designed to improve open‑ended question answering by weaving noisy retrieved evidence into comprehensive, well‑cited answers. It introduces Thought Block Chains (TBCs) that organize claims, key information, and supporting evidence, and uses subordinate TBCs to refine and expand the evidence before final generation. Evaluations on LoQA and DeepResearch Bench show that DeepWeaver enhances content sufficiency, citation grounding, and detail preservation across multiple LLMs.