Can Large Language Models Unlock Novel Scientific Research Ideas?

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2409.06185v2
• Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2025 14:39:52 GMT
• Title: Can Large Language Models Unlock Novel Scientific Research Ideas?
• Authors: Sandeep Kumar, Tirthankar Ghosal, Vinayak Goyal, Asif Ekbal,
• Abstract summary: This study examines the ability of Large Language Models (LLMs) to generate future research ideas from scientific papers.<n>Human evaluation in this setting is extremely challenging ie: it requires substantial domain expertise, contextual understanding of the paper, and awareness of the current research landscape.<n>We propose two automated evaluation metrics: Idea Alignment Score (IAScore) and Idea Distinctness Index.
• Score: 31.88070174767799
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: The widespread adoption of Large Language Models (LLMs) and publicly available ChatGPT have marked a significant turning point in the integration of Artificial Intelligence (AI) into people's everyday lives. This study examines the ability of Large Language Models (LLMs) to generate future research ideas from scientific papers. Unlike tasks such as summarization or translation, idea generation lacks a clearly defined reference set or structure, making manual evaluation the default standard. However, human evaluation in this setting is extremely challenging ie: it requires substantial domain expertise, contextual understanding of the paper, and awareness of the current research landscape. This makes it time-consuming, costly, and fundamentally non-scalable, particularly as new LLMs are being released at a rapid pace. Currently, there is no automated evaluation metric specifically designed for this task. To address this gap, we propose two automated evaluation metrics: Idea Alignment Score (IAScore) and Idea Distinctness Index. We further conducted human evaluation to assess the novelty, relevance, and feasibility of the generated future research ideas. This investigation offers insights into the evolving role of LLMs in idea generation, highlighting both its capability and limitations. Our work contributes to the ongoing efforts in evaluating and utilizing language models for generating future research ideas. We make our datasets and codes publicly available

Related papers

• CoCoNUTS: Concentrating on Content while Neglecting Uninformative Textual Styles for AI-Generated Peer Review Detection [60.52240468810558]
  We introduce CoCoNUTS, a content-oriented benchmark built upon a fine-grained dataset of AI-generated peer reviews.<n>We also develop CoCoDet, an AI review detector via a multi-task learning framework, to achieve more accurate and robust detection of AI involvement in review content.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-28T06:03:11Z)
• Harnessing Large Language Models for Scientific Novelty Detection [49.10608128661251]
  We propose to harness large language models (LLMs) for scientific novelty detection (ND)<n>To capture idea conception, we propose to train a lightweight retriever by distilling the idea-level knowledge from LLMs.<n> Experiments show our method consistently outperforms others on the proposed benchmark datasets for idea retrieval and ND tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-30T14:08:13Z)
• Improving Research Idea Generation Through Data: An Empirical Investigation in Social Science [25.857554476782827]
  This paper explores how augmenting large language models with relevant data during the idea generation process can enhance the quality of generated ideas.<n>We conduct experiments in the social science domain, specifically with climate negotiation topics, and find that metadata improves the feasibility of generated ideas by 20%.<n>A human study shows that LLM-generated ideas, along with their related data and validation processes, inspire researchers to propose research ideas with higher quality.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-27T16:23:42Z)
• AI Idea Bench 2025: AI Research Idea Generation Benchmark [10.983418515389667]
  We present AI Idea Bench 2025, a framework designed to quantitatively evaluate and compare the ideas generated by Language Models (LLMs)<n>The framework comprises a comprehensive dataset of 3,495 AI papers and their associated inspired works, along with a robust evaluation methodology.<n>The evaluation system gauges idea quality in two dimensions: alignment with the ground-truth content of the original papers and judgment based on general reference material.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-19T05:35:45Z)
• Transforming Science with Large Language Models: A Survey on AI-assisted Scientific Discovery, Experimentation, Content Generation, and Evaluation [58.064940977804596]
  A plethora of new AI models and tools has been proposed, promising to empower researchers and academics worldwide to conduct their research more effectively and efficiently. Ethical concerns regarding shortcomings of these tools and potential for misuse take a particularly prominent place in our discussion.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-07T18:26:45Z)
• Survey on Vision-Language-Action Models [0.2636873872510828]
  This work does not represent original research, but highlights how AI can help automate literature reviews.<n>Future research will focus on developing a structured framework for AI-assisted literature reviews.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-07T11:56:46Z)
• LLM4SR: A Survey on Large Language Models for Scientific Research [15.533076347375207]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) offer unprecedented support across various stages of the research cycle. This paper presents the first systematic survey dedicated to exploring how LLMs are revolutionizing the scientific research process.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-01-08T06:44:02Z)
• Explore Theory of Mind: Program-guided adversarial data generation for theory of mind reasoning [88.68573198200698]
  We introduce ExploreToM, the first framework to allow large-scale generation of diverse and challenging theory of mind data.<n>Our approach leverages an A* search over a custom domain-specific language to produce complex story structures and novel, diverse, yet plausible scenarios.<n>Our evaluation reveals that state-of-the-art LLMs, such as Llama-3.1-70B and GPT-4o, show accuracies as low as 0% and 9% on ExploreToM-generated data.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-12T21:29:00Z)
• IdeaBench: Benchmarking Large Language Models for Research Idea Generation [19.66218274796796]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have transformed how people interact with artificial intelligence (AI) systems. We propose IdeaBench, a benchmark system that includes a comprehensive dataset and an evaluation framework. Our dataset comprises titles and abstracts from a diverse range of influential papers, along with their referenced works. Our evaluation framework is a two-stage process: first, using GPT-4o to rank ideas based on user-specified quality indicators such as novelty and feasibility, enabling scalable personalization.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-31T17:04:59Z)
• Chain of Ideas: Revolutionizing Research Via Novel Idea Development with LLM Agents [64.64280477958283]
  An exponential increase in scientific literature makes it challenging for researchers to stay current with recent advances and identify meaningful research directions. Recent developments in large language models(LLMs) suggest a promising avenue for automating the generation of novel research ideas. We propose a Chain-of-Ideas(CoI) agent, an LLM-based agent that organizes relevant literature in a chain structure to effectively mirror the progressive development in a research domain.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-17T03:26:37Z)
• Good Idea or Not, Representation of LLM Could Tell [86.36317971482755]
  We focus on idea assessment, which aims to leverage the knowledge of large language models to assess the merit of scientific ideas. We release a benchmark dataset from nearly four thousand manuscript papers with full texts, meticulously designed to train and evaluate the performance of different approaches to this task. Our findings suggest that the representations of large language models hold more potential in quantifying the value of ideas than their generative outputs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-07T02:07:22Z)
• What Makes a Good Story and How Can We Measure It? A Comprehensive Survey of Story Evaluation [57.550045763103334]
  evaluating a story can be more challenging than other generation evaluation tasks. We first summarize existing storytelling tasks, including text-to-text, visual-to-text, and text-to-visual. We propose a taxonomy to organize evaluation metrics that have been developed or can be adopted for story evaluation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-26T20:35:42Z)
• RelevAI-Reviewer: A Benchmark on AI Reviewers for Survey Paper Relevance [0.8089605035945486]
  We propose RelevAI-Reviewer, an automatic system that conceptualizes the task of survey paper review as a classification problem. We introduce a novel dataset comprised of 25,164 instances. Each instance contains one prompt and four candidate papers, each varying in relevance to the prompt. We develop a machine learning (ML) model capable of determining the relevance of each paper and identifying the most pertinent one.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-13T06:42:32Z)
• MASSW: A New Dataset and Benchmark Tasks for AI-Assisted Scientific Workflows [58.56005277371235]
  We introduce MASSW, a comprehensive text dataset on Multi-Aspect Summarization of ScientificAspects. MASSW includes more than 152,000 peer-reviewed publications from 17 leading computer science conferences spanning the past 50 years. We demonstrate the utility of MASSW through multiple novel machine-learning tasks that can be benchmarked using this new dataset.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-10T15:19:09Z)
• Interesting Scientific Idea Generation Using Knowledge Graphs and LLMs: Evaluations with 100 Research Group Leaders [0.6906005491572401]
  We introduce SciMuse, which uses 58 million research papers and a large-language model to generate research ideas. We conduct a large-scale evaluation in which over 100 research group leaders ranked more than 4,400 personalized ideas based on their interest. This data allows us to predict research interest using (1) supervised neural networks trained on human evaluations, and (2) unsupervised zero-shot ranking with large-language models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-27T11:00:51Z)
• How Well Can LLMs Echo Us? Evaluating AI Chatbots' Role-Play Ability with ECHO [55.25989137825992]
  We introduce ECHO, an evaluative framework inspired by the Turing test. This framework engages the acquaintances of the target individuals to distinguish between human and machine-generated responses. We evaluate three role-playing LLMs using ECHO, with GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 serving as foundational models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-22T08:00:51Z)
• ResearchAgent: Iterative Research Idea Generation over Scientific Literature with Large Language Models [56.08917291606421]
  ResearchAgent is an AI-based system for ideation and operationalization of novel work. ResearchAgent automatically defines novel problems, proposes methods and designs experiments, while iteratively refining them. We experimentally validate our ResearchAgent on scientific publications across multiple disciplines.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-11T13:36:29Z)
• CLOMO: Counterfactual Logical Modification with Large Language Models [109.60793869938534]
  We introduce a novel task, Counterfactual Logical Modification (CLOMO), and a high-quality human-annotated benchmark. In this task, LLMs must adeptly alter a given argumentative text to uphold a predetermined logical relationship. We propose an innovative evaluation metric, the Self-Evaluation Score (SES), to directly evaluate the natural language output of LLMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-29T08:29:54Z)
• A Survey of GPT-3 Family Large Language Models Including ChatGPT and GPT-4 [4.206175795966694]
  Large language models (LLMs) are a special class of pretrained language models obtained by scaling model size, pretraining corpus and computation. We refer to GPT-3 and its successor OpenAI models, including ChatGPT and GPT4, as GPT-3 family large language models (GLLMs)
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-04T16:37:05Z)
• The Dawn of LMMs: Preliminary Explorations with GPT-4V(ision) [121.42924593374127]
  We analyze the latest model, GPT-4V, to deepen the understanding of LMMs. GPT-4V's unprecedented ability in processing arbitrarily interleaved multimodal inputs makes it a powerful multimodal generalist system. GPT-4V's unique capability of understanding visual markers drawn on input images can give rise to new human-computer interaction methods.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-09-29T17:34:51Z)
• A Survey on Multimodal Large Language Models [71.63375558033364]
  Multimodal Large Language Model (MLLM) represented by GPT-4V has been a new rising research hotspot. This paper aims to trace and summarize the recent progress of MLLMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-06-23T15:21:52Z)
• A Bibliometric Review of Large Language Models Research from 2017 to 2023 [1.4190701053683017]
  Large language models (LLMs) are language models that have demonstrated outstanding performance across a range of natural language processing (NLP) tasks. This paper serves as a roadmap for researchers, practitioners, and policymakers to navigate the current landscape of LLMs research.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-04-03T21:46:41Z)
• Sparks of Artificial General Intelligence: Early experiments with GPT-4 [66.1188263570629]
  GPT-4, developed by OpenAI, was trained using an unprecedented scale of compute and data. We demonstrate that GPT-4 can solve novel and difficult tasks that span mathematics, coding, vision, medicine, law, psychology and more. We believe GPT-4 could reasonably be viewed as an early (yet still incomplete) version of an artificial general intelligence (AGI) system.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-03-22T16:51:28Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.