arXiv:2606. 15497v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: The automation of science is a long-standing ambition in the field of AI.
By Yutaro Yamada, Robert Tjarko Lange, Cong Lu, Chris Lu, Shengran Hu, Jakob Foerster, David Ha, Jeff Clune
The paper introduces SGHA, a fully automated system that discovers research problems by structuring scientific literature into evidence-linked objects and a typed evidence graph. SGHA operates entirely on a local 9B open‑weight language model, avoiding proprietary frontier‑model APIs, and outputs traceable research‑problem families with assumptions, objectives, success criteria, and ambiguities. Comparative experiments in five machine‑learning domains show that SGHA’s corpus‑first, evidence‑constrained approach yields inspectable research‑problem formulation without relying on external models.
By Sarvesh Gharat, Junpei Komiyama
The paper proposes a framework that adapts systematic review methods—planning, conducting, and documenting—to the retrieval of machine learning assets in AI registries. By treating models, datasets, and benchmarks as first‑class units of analysis, the framework incorporates registry‑aware search, cross‑registry schema alignment, and dependency‑driven exploration to make asset selection transparent, reproducible, and evidence‑based. The authors argue that this approach transforms ML asset discovery from an informal, ad‑hoc process into a structured, systematic practice.
By Alexandra Gonz\'alez, Quim Motger, Xavier Franch, Silverio Mart\'inez-Fern\'andez
The paper investigates how large language models can extract contextualized data from scientific literature. It presents four workflows: expert‑written prompts, self‑generated prompts, autonomous literature discovery, and dataset creation from guidelines. While models perform well with prompts, they struggle with context, hallucinate references, and still need human oversight for final validation.
By Valentin Romanov, Monique Bax, Steven Niederer
arXiv:2610.07132v1 Announce Type: cross
Abstract: Croissant has emerged as a standard for machine-readable dataset metadata, yet populating its fields remains labor-intensive and requires careful rea...
By Berke Arda, Ahmetcan Yavuz, Paul Gerry, Sebastian Lobentanzer, Nobin Sarwar, Joan Giner-Miguelez, Kongtao Chen, Luyao Zhang, Mrinmaya Sachan, Mubashara Akhtar
The paper evaluates browser-based large language models (LLMs) for extracting detailed, contextualized data from scientific papers. It presents four workflows: (1) expert-curated prompts yield good extraction but struggle with nuance; (2) LLMs can generate effective prompts from simple instructions; (3) autonomous literature discovery is challenging, with missing or hallucinated references; (4) LLMs can build new datasets from guidelines that align closely with human experts, yet still need human oversight. The study outlines a practical, auditable workflow where experts set standards, models cross-check extractions, and researchers resolve disputes, enabling scalable scientific data curation.