arXiv AI By Hannah Le, Ramesh Ramasamy, Alex Urrutia, Mahsa Yazdani, Tim Proctor, Kenny Workman

TxBench-PP: Analyzing AI Agent Performance on Small-Molecule Preclinical Pharmacology

Read the original on arXiv AI →

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.

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
Jun 16

MedAI: Evaluating TxAgent's Therapeutic Agentic Reasoning in the NeurIPS CURE-Bench Competition

arXiv:2512. 11682v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Therapeutic decision-making in clinical medicine constitutes a high-stakes domain in which AI guidance interacts with complex interactions among patient characteristics, disease processes, and pharmacological agents.

By Tim Cofala, Christian Kalfar, Jingge Xiao, Johanna Schrader, Michelle Tang, Wolfgang Nejdl
arXiv Machine Learning
Aug 24

Designing a Robust LLM-Based Evaluation System for Agentic AI in Drug Discovery Through Human Alignment

The paper introduces an LLM-as-a-Judge framework for evaluating the outputs of an agentic drug discovery assistant, ChatInvent, deployed at AstraZeneca. It defines four quality dimensions—Completeness, Relevancy, Structural Clarity, and Scope Adherence—alongside deterministic Tool Call Correctness checks, and validates the judge against five expert annotators. After optimizing the best-performing judge with few-shot demonstrations, alignment with human majority votes improves from 0.80 to 0.86, and the framework reveals that informal question phrasing does not degrade output quality.

By Emma Granqvist, Roc\'io Mercado, Samuel Genheden
arXiv AI
Sep 11

OpenDiscoveryTrace: Process Traces for Evaluating AI Scientist Workflows

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 AI
Jun 30

Accelerating scientific discovery with Co-Scientist

arXiv:2502. 18864v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Scientific discovery is driven by scientists generating novel hypotheses for complex problems that undergo rigorous experimental validation.

By Juraj Gottweis, Wei-Hung Weng, Alexander Daryin, Tao Tu, Petar Sirkovic, Artiom Myaskovsky, Grzegorz Glowaty, Felix Weissenberger, Alessio Orlandi, Dan Popovici, Anil Palepu, Keran Rong, Ryutaro Tanno, Khaled Saab, Fan Zhang, Jacob Blum, Andrew Carroll, Kavita Kulkarni, Nenad Tomasev, Dina Zverinski, Ivor Rendulic, Elahe Vedadi, Florian Hasler, Luka Rimanic, Marina Boia, Ivan Budiselic, Ben Feinstein, Mathias Bellaiche, Tom Sheffer, Jan Freyberg, Jeremy Ratcliff, Ottavia Bertolli, Katherine Chou, Avinatan Hassidim, Burak Gokturk, Amin Vahdat, Yuan Guan, Vikram Dhillon, Eeshit Dhaval Vaishnav, Byron Lee, Tiago R D Costa, Jos\'e R Penad\'es, Gary Peltz, Yossi Matias, James Manyika, Demis Hassabis, Yunhan Xu, Pushmeet Kohli, Annalisa Pawlosky, Alan Karthikesalingam, Vivek Natarajan