arXiv:2602. 20459v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Can AI systems trained on the existing scientific record forecast the advances that will follow?
arXiv:2609.26361v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: With the rapid pace of AI research and the hundreds of daily new publications, staying up-to-date with the latest developments has become increasingl...
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...
arXiv:2609.22174v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Anticipating emerging research directions is a critical goal of AI-assisted science. Existing methods mainly predict which concepts will co-occur in...
arXiv:2606.22342v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: How does research evolve, and can we trace it at the level of individual claims? Scientific progress is not simply a uniform accumulation of facts....
arXiv:2609.24921v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Scientific weak signals are early, low-visibility research directions that later become central to mature scientific topics, yet existing resources suc...
The paper "Learning to Ideate for Scientific Impact" explores using delayed signals of scientific uptake—specifically citation-normalized impact—as feedback to steer large language models toward generating high‑impact research ideas. The authors build a dataset of over 100,000 computer science papers, train a reward model to predict citation impact from goal‑idea pairs, and align an idea generator via supervised fine‑tuning and reinforcement learning. Evaluation with a reference‑grounded protocol shows that the RL‑tuned model consistently produces ideas with higher estimated impact than baseline models.
Scientific weak signals are early, low-visibility research directions that later become central to mature scientific topics, yet existing resources such as trend tracking, citation forecasting, and fo...
How does research evolve, and what substrate would let us forecast where it goes next? Scientific progress is not simply a uniform accumulation of facts: ideas extend prior methods, address known limitations, realize proposed future directions, and sometimes dispute earlier claims.
The paper introduces the Scientific Contribution Graph, a large-scale resource that extracts 6 million scientific contributions from 655 k open-access papers across multiple disciplines and links them with 36 million prerequisite edges. It frames automated technological roadmapping as the task of identifying contributions and their prerequisites, and presents a new scientific prerequisite prediction task where models forecast which existing technologies enable future discoveries. The authors report that current models achieve a 0.48 MAP score on temporally-filtered backtesting, indicating rapid progress in this area.
arXiv:2508.14273v3 Announce Type: replace Abstract: As researchers increasingly adopt LLMs as writing assistants, generating high-quality research paper introductions remains both challenging and ess...
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.
arXiv:2608.28625v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: We study predictive pretraining for scientific document representation using the discourse structure of papers. We propose SciJEPA, a citation-free f...