arXiv AI By Shlomo Kashani

QuantumNovelty: A Skill-Orchestrating Language Agent for Referee-Style Review and Patentability Screening of Quantum Papers and Patents

Read the original on arXiv AI →

arXiv:2608. 16900v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Language-model agents increasingly produce quantum-science results; we ask whether the same agentic paradigm can also scrutinize them in an auditable, reproducible, and cost-transparent form.

Summary generated by The Flow from the publisher's feed. The full article lives at arXiv AI.

arXiv AI
Jul 24

Evaluating and Guarding Citation Faithfulness in Agentic Scientific Synthesis

arXiv:2607. 20527v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Agentic LLM systems such as OpenScholar and PaperQA2 read the scientific literature and return cited answers, and both they and their benchmarks already check whether those citations hold, with a fixed attribution model or human graders.

By Taewan Goo, Junsik Kim, Kyulhee Han, GwonYul Jo, Jong-Soo Kim, Tae-Hyung Kim
arXiv AI
Aug 11

QuantumMind: Constraint-Grounded Agentic Reasoning for Speedup Analysis in Quantum Computing

arXiv:2608. 07743v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Identifying a meaningful quantum speedup requires more than matching a classical problem to a familiar quantum primitive: the claim must preserve the task, respect access and output models, expose required promises, and remain within a defensible complexity scope.

By Yijing Zuo, Zhe Fu, Zihan Nie, Zhihui Zhu, Haohan Wang
arXiv AI
Jun 30

A Machine-Verified Proof of a Quantum-Optimization Conjecture

arXiv:2606. 29687v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: We report a machine-verified resolution of a problem open for over a decade in quantum optimization: the Farhi, Goldstone and Gutmann (FGG) conjecture that depth-$p$ Quantum Approximate Optimization Algorithm (QAOA) on the ring of disagrees attains approximation ratio $(2p+1)/(2p+2)$ exactly.

By Uri Kol, Maor Ben-Shahar, Kfir Sulimany, Dirk Englund
arXiv AI
Jun 17

BadScientist: Can a Research Agent Write Convincing but Unsound Papers that Fool LLM Reviewers?

arXiv:2510. 18003v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: The convergence of LLM-powered research assistants and AI-based peer review systems creates a critical vulnerability: fully automated publication loops where AI-generated research is evaluated by AI reviewers without human oversight.

By Fengqing Jiang, Yichen Feng, Yuetai Li, Luyao Niu, Basel Alomair, Radha Poovendran