A framework that turns a traceable, reproducible, scope controlled research corpus into ranked, falsifiable research questions is presented, instantiate the framework on exoplanet atmospheres, a domain that uniquely combines literature, structured catalogs, and space telescope archives.
Abstract
Current AI systems are optimized for answering questions; the scientific enterprise is bottlenecked earlier, at discovering the questions worth investigating. We present a framework that turns a traceable, reproducible, scope controlled research corpus into ranked, falsifiable research questions: evidence is represented as provenance carrying claims; cross paper tensions are detected, typed, and human adjudicated; surviving signals are refined into questions and ranked by a two stage protocol separating scientific priority from execution priority. We instantiate the framework on exoplanet atmospheres, a domain that uniquely combines literature, structured catalogs, and space telescope archives. In a historical backtest, all questions generated from evidence available before 2021 were substantively engaged by the 2021 to 2026 literature the sys?tem never saw: two were answered, including one whose premise the community later explicitly refuted and the top ranked question is independently posed and still open. These results sug?gest that systematic question discovery from evidence tensions surfaces the questions working scientists subsequently invest in.
Systems that generate scientific research questions are evaluated today by expert scores, LLM-as-judge ratings, or curated case studies -- all subjective, none falsifiable. We formalize historical backtesting as an alternative: a system generates questions from a corpus frozen at a historical cutoff, the questions are...
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.
The Structural Gap Hypothesis Agent (SGHA), a fully automated, corpus-first research-problem discovery system that runs entirely on a local LLM, is introduced and compared with the AI Scientist-v2 idea formulation module in five machine-learning domains.
Results support treating PHD as a distinct target for evaluating how LLMs formulate investigative directions when final conclusions are withheld, with gains for several lower-performing models on HypoArena but regressions for other systems, including a top-performing model.
Tianyun Zhong, Wangyi Jiang, Wei Wang et al.· arXiv.org· 0 citations
Most current tasks remain suitable for evaluating the fitting and recombination of previously unseen expressions, but are insufficient on their own to identify contributions from priors beyond a fixed search space.
These results are preliminary and use LLM judges rather than human domain experts, but they support a narrow scientific-discovery claim: explicit derivation constraints are a promising mechanism for making LLM-generated scientific questions more auditable.
Yufeng Wang· arXiv.org· 1 citation
We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads.
See our Cookie Policy.