arXiv AI By David Li, Shaamil Karim, Christian Gensbigler

BioStudyBench: Evaluating Agents on Post-Cutoff Biomedical Studies

Read the original on arXiv AI →

BioStudyBench is a new benchmark that tests AI agents on 25 long‑horizon analysis tasks derived from biomedical studies published between July and September 2026, after the models’ knowledge cutoffs. Each task gives the agent a neutral research question but no data files, requiring it to locate and download relevant public data, search literature using tools limited to pre‑cutoff records, and perform data analysis to report findings. The benchmark shows that providing data and tools improves model performance by an average of 47 percentage points, with closed‑weight models outperforming open‑weight ones (best open‑weight 81.3% vs. best closed‑weight 94.7%).

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 AI
Jun 24

BioMedArena: An Open-source Toolkit for Building and Evaluating Biomedical Deep Research Agents

arXiv:2605. 06177v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Reproducing and comparing deep research agents today is hard: the same backbone evaluated on the same benchmark can report different accuracies across papers because the harness and tool registry differ, and integrating a new model into a comparable evaluation surface costs weeks of model-specific engineering.

By Jinge Wu, Hongjian Zhou, Mingde Zeng, Jiayuan Zhu, Junde Wu, Jiazhen Pan, Ayush Noori, Sean Wu, Honghan Wu, Fenglin Liu, David A. Clifton
arXiv AI
Jun 11

Can AI Agents Synthesize Scientific Conclusions?

arXiv:2606. 11337v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Scientific AI agents increasingly retrieve evidence, reason across sources, and synthesize conclusions used in consequential decisions.

By Hayoung Jung, Pedro Viana Diniz, Jos\'e Reinaldo Corr\^ea Roveda, Abner Fernandes da Silva, Haeun Jung, Enoch Tsai, Aleksandra Korolova, Manoel Horta Ribeiro
arXiv AI
6d ago

AI-Driven Reproducibility and Analytical Robustness in Scientific Discovery

The paper introduces SEER‑Repro, a benchmark of 20 SEER‑based studies with data and resources for reproduction. An LLM agent reproduces 77.4% of 2,190 atomic claims and provides executable baselines. An agentic analysis pipeline then tests robustness by identifying analytical choices, proposing alternatives, and rerunning analyses, flagging potentially consequential choices in 9.5% of fully reproduced findings for expert review.

By Shicheng Liu, Krista Opsahl-Ong, Andrew Drozdov, Julian Killingback, Arnav Singhvi, Ronak Pradeep, Michael Bendersky, James C. Dickerson, Monica S. Lam