arXiv:2606. 26460v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: AI-based scientific automation is increasingly possible by using agents to generate hypotheses, design experiments, and analyze data.
Machine-generated by The Flow from the publisher's headline and feed description — not written or checked by a human. The full article lives at arXiv AI.
arXiv:2606. 26448v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Across the sciences, autonomous systems are increasingly being used in closed-loop discovery, proposing new theories and designing and running experiments to test them.
The article discusses how artificial intelligence is beginning to automate scientific discovery, specifically in the realm of cognitive science. It outlines four key challenges for developing an automated science of the mind: representing experiments, generating synthetic behavior, synthesizing models, and closing the loop to discover psychological theories. The authors argue that addressing these challenges will enable AI to systematically advance our understanding of the mind.
As AI agents are increasingly deployed in complex environments, understanding their behaviors becomes critical. Yet behavioral scientific research on AI agents remains manual and labor-intensive.
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.
arXiv:2606. 11217v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: The proliferation of large language models (LLMs) and autonomous AI agents has given rise to a rapidly growing methodological paradigm: "in silico" behavioral experiments.
The paper introduces AutoMat, a benchmark designed to test large language model (LLM) coding agents on their ability to reproduce claims from computational materials science. AutoMat presents three challenges: reconstructing underspecified procedures, navigating specialized toolchains, and assessing whether the evidence supports a claim. Experiments show that current LLM agents achieve low success rates, with the best setting reaching only 53%, and failures stem mainly from incomplete procedures, methodological deviations, and execution fragility.