arXiv AI By Ayush Bansal, Aldo Pareja, Sean Klein, Serge Didenko, Artem Lukoianov

Can LLMs predict the outcomes of machine learning experiments?

Read the original on arXiv AI →

The paper investigates whether large language models (LLMs) can anticipate the outcomes of machine‑learning experiments they generate. Using a dataset of 288 LLM‑proposed ideas across eight MLE‑bench tasks, the authors prompt five state‑of‑the‑art LLMs to predict each idea’s impact before training. Results show that while predictions outperform random chance, accuracy is limited—Claude Opus 5.5 explains only about half the variance (R² = 0.49), all models underestimate effect sizes, and performance varies by task, with coding harness choice having little influence.

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
1d ago

Language Models Learn to Improve Language Models

The paper introduces LM2LM, a method that trains large language models (LLMs) to propose improvements for other LLMs using reinforcement learning (RL). It employs a frozen research world model (RWM) to predict the gains of proposals, providing a cheaper surrogate reward, and periodically validates high‑scoring proposals to keep feedback reliable. Experiments across eight LM development environments show that LM2LM enables a Qwen3.8‑27B model to outperform GPT‑6‑sol on held‑out tasks while reducing data‑generation cost by 33%, and it generalizes to unseen model families.

By Minhua Lin, Zijun Wang, Zewen Liu, Zhaotian Weng, Bing He, Zhan Shi, Benoit Dumoulin, Xiang Zhang, Suhang Wang, Hanqing Lu
arXiv AI
Oct 1

ArchitectureIQ: On the Measure of Training Intuition

arXiv:2609.39714v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Top researchers have good intuition, but do language models have as good intuition about model training as top AI researchers? To measure model intuiti...

By Zirui Ren, Shaoyang Guo, Chencheng Tang, Jinxin Wang, Chengyu Xiong, Shanbin Yu, Peihang Li, Yidi Wu, Bangzhe Huang, Qingyu Qu, Leqian Yang, Ziming Liu
arXiv Computation and Language
Oct 9

Language Models as AI Research World Models

The paper proposes using language models as Research World Models (RWMs) to predict outcomes of experimental interventions across diverse research environments. By training on over 2,600 experimental records and 171,000 GPU‑hours, RWMs improve prediction accuracy within and across environments, reducing selection regret by up to 78% and boosting gains in multi‑round autoresearch. Ablation studies show that incorporating research knowledge yields greater benefits than merely changing the language model or increasing reasoning effort.

By Zijun Wang, Zewen Liu, Minhua Lin, Zhaotian Weng, Zhan Shi, Bing He, Yisi Sang, Dakuo Wang, Benoit Dumoulin, Wei Jin, Yuyin Zhou, Cihang Xie, Hanqing Lu
arXiv Machine Learning
Oct 9

DataSense-Bench: The First Step Toward an AI Scientist

DataSense-Bench is a new benchmark that tests whether advanced AI models can choose and rank training data subsets that will improve a small language model’s performance. The benchmark lets agents inspect data, run analysis code, and perform forward passes, but not train the model or access evaluation tasks. After agents select subsets, the base model is fine‑tuned on each subset and evaluated, measuring both the performance of the best subset and the accuracy of the agents’ rankings. Experiments show limited gains over random selection and inconsistent ranking ability across tasks, with agents often using similar data signals but interpreting their value differently.

By Yudi Zhang, Mingyu Cao, Lu Yin, Mykola Pechenizkiy, Shiwei Liu
Hugging Face Trending Papers
4d ago

MLExpert: Towards a Generalist Agentic Model for Autonomous Machine Learning Engineering

MLExpert is a 35B Mixture-of-Experts agentic model designed to autonomously conduct long‑horizon machine learning engineering (MLE) tasks. It uses a post‑training approach that combines hierarchical supervised fine‑tuning with Windowed Interaction RL to learn from intermediate outcomes in complex experimentation workflows. On the MLE‑Bench Lite benchmark, MLExpert raises the average medal rate from 37.9% to 72.7%, matching the performance of larger frontier models and demonstrating transferable optimization capabilities to other benchmarks such as NatureBench Lite.