A framework for automated theoretical research in causal inference built on the Lean proof assistant, where a proof is checked by a program rather than read by a referee is presented, where a proof is checked by a program rather than read by a referee.
Abstract
Automating theoretical research requires generating candidate results and evaluating them reliably. Models keep getting better at the first, while the second remains hard. A common approach asks one large language model (LLM) to review what another produced, yet such reviewers are empirically unreliable: they may accept fabricated papers and catch the fabrication at close to chance rates~\citep{badscientist2025}. We present \textsc{CausalSmith}, a framework for automated theoretical research in causal inference built on the Lean proof assistant, where a proof is checked by a program rather than read by a referee. \textsc{CausalSmith} rests on \textsc{Causalean}, a foundational Lean library for causal inference holding 8,179 machine-checked definitions and theorems, developed with language-model assistance under human design and review. Around it, we build a self-improving agentic pipeline that selects research topics, proposes results, formalizes statements, constructs proofs, and presents the resulting artifacts for human inspection. Moreover, the pipeline pairs Lean verification with a statement audit that compares each formal theorem against the informal claim behind it. We evaluate the system using artifacts produced by completed autonomous research runs. The source code, formal library, and run records are available at https://github.com/Jiyuan-Tan/CausalSmith.
The scientific method has long guided empirical research in Software Engineering (SE), but the complexity of modern software systems often hinders its systematic application. This paper introduces ECLAIR, a causally grounded AI framework that integrates Large Language Models (LLMs) into every stage of the scientific process, from hypothesis generation to analysis and interpretation. ECLAIR treats LLMs as active scientific agents operating under the principles of causal inference, within a human-in-the-loop design that safeguards against the risks of unsound automated reasoning. We demonstrate the framework through a case study examining how prompt design influences code generation accuracy in two LLMs. Results show that, for both models, instruction-style, longer few-shot, and signature-augmented prompts yield small negative causal effects on accuracy, illustrating how causal reasoning provides a principled foundation for explaining why software phenomena occur. This study presents the first causally grounded structured methodology for embedding LLMs within the scientific method in SE, designed around the epistemological demands of empirical SE research, establishing a basis for rigorous AI-assisted research.
Alejandro Velasco, Daniel Rodríguez-Cárdenas, Dipin Khati et al.· 0 citations
A probe corpus of 42 retracted, fraudulent, and pseudoscientific papers is paired with a methodology for eliciting and scoring single-shot model engagement with each paper's framing, indicating an urgent need for guardrail infrastructure for scientific deployment of language models.
Automated fact-checking systems still fall short of producing explanations that mirror the depth and structure of expert human reasoning. In this work, we propose a multi-agent framework that integrates five specialized linguistic agents covering polarization, linguistic style, argumentation, plausibility, and contextual framing with web-based evidence retrieval, synthesized by a supervisor agent into structured reports resembling professional fact-checking outputs. We evaluate the framework on a dataset of fact-checked Brazilian news through a classification benchmark and two further quantitative studies of explanation quality, addressing: (1) Do the generated reports elicit reader confidence comparable to reports written by professional fact-checkers? and (2) Which explanatory dimensions most influence reader confidence? The classification benchmark shows the framework performs competitively with strong baselines. A blinded within-subjects study with 95 participants, analyzed via Linear Mixed Models, shows that post-verification confidence reaches levels statistically indistinguishable from expert-written reports, with plausibility and analytical depth as the strongest predictors of confidence gain and depth being especially important for implausible claims. Complementary LLM-as-a-judge experiments corroborate these findings, showing the framework’s explanations are consistently preferred for depth, persuasion, and plausibility.
Pedro Henrique de Oliveira Silva, L. Santos, L. Marinho et al.· Proceedings of the 37th ACM...· 0 citations
Defeasible reasoning is a type of reasoning where inferences are drawn from plausible current evidence, but can be retracted upon the introduction of newer evidence. Although recent studies have examined language-model behaviors in defeasible reasoning, the datasets have been static and lack wide coverage of non-monotonic reasoning categories. We introduce DeReLab, a generative framework that produces multi-turn belief-updating conversations from parameterized graph structures across default and inheritance reasoning, with formally verified ground truth at every turn, enabling controlled measurement of how models respond to confirming and disconfirming evidence. This controlled generation process creates a testbed for experimental designs that isolate specific reasoning demands. Applying this capability to the study of confirmation bias, we evaluate nine open and proprietary large language models and find that nearly all exhibit a systematic tendency to accept congruent evidence while resisting incongruent updates, with several models correctly identifying a weakening update yet failing to revise their conclusion. We believe our work and findings will facilitate future research on evaluating language models in defeasible reasoning.
Jayanta Sadhu, S. Shahad, Kenneth Marino· 0 citations
Adaptive AI agents can help make BIM data more machine-readable by navigating IFC models, interpreting inconsistent information, and mapping it to defined standards. In this blog, Alok Rawat shares findings from a real-world pilot in construction workflows. The post Adaptive AI Agents in Construction Workflows appeared first on GPT-Lab.
What does it take to trust AI-driven HVAC optimization? Our AI Model Factory combines agents, machine learning, reinforcement learning and deterministic checks in a governed workflow designed for messy, real-world building data. The post We built an AI factory for HVAC control appeared first on GPT-Lab.
We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads.
See our Cookie Policy.
