OpenDiscoveryTrace is a public dataset of 558 complete AI scientific agent trajectories that records the reasoning process—thoughts, tool calls, observations, errors, revision triggers, and confidence—across 124 scientific tasks in drug discovery, materials science, genomics, and literature analysis. The dataset includes seven models (three frontier models and four open‑weight models) and 60 live‑retrieval variants, providing a balanced view of performance and error patterns. Pilot analysis shows that process traces reveal behavioral differences invisible to output‑only evaluation, such as differing error rates and types among frontier models.
By Aayam Bansal, Keertan Balaji
arXiv:2607. 19262v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: As pathogen genomic surveillance scales, the bottleneck is shifting from data generation to analysis.
By Harmon Bhasin, Kevin Flyangolts, Dianzhuo Wang, Evan Seeyave, Arjun Banerjee, Amanda Darling, Joshua Stallings, David Stern, Shawn Higdon, Claire Duvallet, Bryan Tegomoh, Kenny Workman
The study evaluates whether detailed, profession‑specific system prompts improve performance on scientific tasks. Using an open‑source corpus of 503 agent profiles and Gemini 3.8 Flash, the authors compared matched profiles to four control prompts across nine text‑based science benchmarks and a tool‑using bioinformatics benchmark. Results show no consistent accuracy gains; matched profiles actually increased token usage and cost, and in some cases reduced success rates, with only a minor advantage in one benchmark likely due to prompt length rather than domain expertise.
By Timothy Kassis
arXiv:2606. 19245v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Artificial intelligence (AI) agents promise to accelerate drug discovery by compressing interpretation and decision-making loops, but practical deployment requires trusted evaluation on realistic program decisions.
By Hannah Le, Ramesh Ramasamy, Alex Urrutia, Mahsa Yazdani, Tim Proctor, Kenny Workman
arXiv:2601. 21800v4 Announce Type: replace Abstract: We introduce BioAgent Bench, an evaluation suite designed for measuring the performance and robustness of AI agents in common bioinformatics tasks.
By Dionizije Fa, Marko Culjak, Bruno Pandza, Mateo Cupic
arXiv:2609.27490v1 Announce Type: new
Abstract: AI research agents need reliable knowledge of how their experiments change outcomes. We introduce WhatWorkedBench to measure experimental understanding...
By Jingjie Ning, Xueqi Li, Yibo Kong, Dongting Li