Aug 2026· Proceedings of the 32nd ACM SIGKDD Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining V.2· 0 citations· 1 references
Abstract
Large language models and foundation models are increasingly embedded in reasoning systems that plan, invoke tools, use memory, gather evidence, and iteratively refine their outputs. The second KDD Day on AI Reasoning brings together researchers and practitioners from academia and industry to examine how these systems can be made more capable, reliable, interpretable, and efficient. The program spans scientific discovery, human-centered interaction, software engineering, time-series analysis, deep research, computer use, and inference infrastructure. Across these domains, the day highlights shared challenges: grounding decisions in evidence, designing effective feedback and verification mechanisms, evaluating open-ended behavior, managing test-time computation, and preserving meaningful human control. Through keynote and invited presentations, the event provides a forum for connecting advances in models, agents, data, systems, and applications, and for identifying research directions toward trustworthy next-generation reasoning systems.
This article examines the emerging paradigm of agentic AI for scientific discovery, traces the conceptual shift from tools to agents, lays out a six-stage workflow spanning literature synthesis to manuscript generation, and reviews practical systems in chemistry, equation discovery, materials science, and general machine learning research.
Alexander Taktakidze· Longevity Horizon· 0 citations
ReasFlow is introduced, an end-to-end autonomous agent system for reasoning-centric scientific discovery that operationalizes a collaborative paradigm where the human expert acts as Principal Investigator while the agent executes rigorous derivations as a capable graduate student.
Yutong He, Daibo Li, Guohong Li et al.· 1 citation
Through applied case studies in pharmaceutical discovery and financial systems, common design patterns that make agentic systems successful are analyzed, and practical mitigation strategies for failure modes are discussed, such as verification pipelines, fallback mechanisms, and human-in-the-loop supervision.
Grace Hui Yang, P. Venkit, Hooman Sedghamiz et al.· Proceedings of the 32nd ACM...· 0 citations
Most AI-for-science systems focus on scaling a single reasoning process by using better models, larger context windows, long-horizon agentic execution, or digital co-scientists working with one principal user. However, challenging scientific problems are rarely solved by one reasoner alone. They are solved by teams whose members carry different priors, experimental background, tacit knowledge, and domain-trained intuitions. The open problem is therefore not only how to scale models, but how to develop"networked intelligence", scaling the connections between humans and AI systems so that a result or hypothesis produced in one context reaches another person, agent, instrument or robot that can act on it. We introduce Mycelium, an active shared workspace that automatically connects researchers and AI agents. As human users and agents work, the system captures important observations and hypotheses, tracks how they relate to the team's evolving knowledge model, and routes them to the person or agent whose next decision they can inform. We evaluate Mycelium through a real-world scientific discovery use case: a biological multi-omics campaign where shared context turned a local analytical finding into a cross-expert mechanistic constraint and ultimately into an experimental design. Finally, we describe networked intelligence as sparse conditional computation over distributed scientific contexts. This framework establishes when a scaled standalone agent is sufficient, and when isolated data and specialized expertise make a networked approach essential.
Sutanay Choudhury, Jeffrey J. Czajka, L. Monteiro et al.· 0 citations
Modern reasoning models depend on reasoning data, today sourced from human annotations or distilled from stronger LLMs. However, a rich and largely untapped source of supervision lies in expert systems (e.g., game engines, classical planners, theorem provers), which routinely produce near-optimal actions across diverse domains. But these experts are silent: they commit to an action without writing down the chain of thought (CoT) behind it. Recovering that CoT as natural-language reasoning would distill expert knowledge into a student that generalizes beyond the demonstrated actions. We treat it as a latent variable and study how to recover it from the action alone. Our approach, LeAct (Learning to reason from Actions), optimizes this latent variable: the student samples candidate CoTs for each expert action, and we retain those that measurably improve its own probability of recovering the action. Across imperfect-information games at multiple scales and a simulated robotics benchmark, LeAct reaches the solver's numerical floor on small enumerable games. At larger scale, it is $5\times$ closer to the solver than the strongest expert-iteration baseline. At Flop Hold'em ($\sim 10^9$ infosets), LeAct wins head-to-head by $+60$ mbb/g, and on the robotics probe it is the only training recipe that improves on direct imitation. We present a principled framework and the result: expert systems become a categorically new source of reasoning teachers for foundation models.
Ziran Yang, Chengshuai Shi, Raj Ghugare et al.· 0 citations
Mechanist is an agentic system that uses AI as a scientific instrument for the autonomous discovery of mechanisms underlying AI intelligence, and develops a mechanism theory of belief, revealing how models represent world knowledge, form beliefs, infer the beliefs of others, and how these mechanisms emerge during pretraining.
Mengru Wang, Junfeng Fang, Shuofei Qiao et al.· 0 citations