arXiv:2509. 21028v4 Announce Type: replace Abstract: We introduce SciTrek, a synthetic question-answering dataset for assessing and improving long-context numerical reasoning in large language models (LLMs).
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:2607. 20926v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Scientific research involves complex information-seeking and reasoning workflows across heterogeneous sources.
arXiv:2604. 13201v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Large language models are emerging as scientific assistants, but evaluating their ability to reason from empirical data remains challenging.
SciDocBench is a workflow-centered benchmark for scientific document understanding that includes 124 expert-authored questions across seven capability groups and 19 subtasks in five scientific domains. Each question is evaluated under four conditions—English or Chinese, all-images-first or interleaved document representations—resulting in 496 evaluation instances. The benchmark is paired with SciDocIR, a typed evidence-graph representation, and SciDocDataset, a collection of 15K fine-tuning and 8K reinforcement-learning samples, forming an evaluation-to-training framework for scientific-document assistants.
The paper introduces the Large Knowledge Model (LKM), a scientific knowledge infrastructure that converts research literature into shared, computationally accessible reasoning graphs. LKM aligns questions, claims, and reasoning chains across papers, creating a Scientific Reasoning Landscape with Question, Workflow, and Evidence views. The system enhances scientific search, evidence‑grounded QA, and research planning, achieving notable accuracy gains on ChemBench, PubMedQA, and SciBench.
Scientific research increasingly relies on large, heterogeneous data sources, motivating interest in retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) systems that provide natural language access to scientific kno...
The paper presents the first large‑scale benchmark for uncertainty quantification (UQ) calibration in long‑form scientific question answering, evaluating four UQ methods on 685,000 responses from up to 20 large language models across seven datasets. It shows that instruction tuning leads to token‑level probability polarization, undermining token‑level uncertainty signals, while reasoning model families differ in how they handle this effect. Only semantic consistency—consistency of the final answer—provides well‑calibrated outputs, demonstrating that semantic calibration remains robust in multi‑step, dependency‑rich reasoning.