Evaluating Large Language Models in Scientific Discovery

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2512.15567v1
• Date: Wed, 17 Dec 2025 16:20:03 GMT
• Title: Evaluating Large Language Models in Scientific Discovery
• Authors: Zhangde Song, Jieyu Lu, Yuanqi Du, Botao Yu, Thomas M. Pruyn, Yue Huang, Kehan Guo, Xiuzhe Luo, Yuanhao Qu, Yi Qu, Yinkai Wang, Haorui Wang, Jeff Guo, Jingru Gan, Parshin Shojaee, Di Luo, Andres M Bran, Gen Li, Qiyuan Zhao, Shao-Xiong Lennon Luo, Yuxuan Zhang, Xiang Zou, Wanru Zhao, Yifan F. Zhang, Wucheng Zhang, Shunan Zheng, Saiyang Zhang, Sartaaj Takrim Khan, Mahyar Rajabi-Kochi, Samantha Paradi-Maropakis, Tony Baltoiu, Fengyu Xie, Tianyang Chen, Kexin Huang, Weiliang Luo, Meijing Fang, Xin Yang, Lixue Cheng, Jiajun He, Soha Hassoun, Xiangliang Zhang, Wei Wang, Chandan K. Reddy, Chao Zhang, Zhiling Zheng, Mengdi Wang, Le Cong, Carla P. Gomes, Chang-Yu Hsieh, Aditya Nandy, Philippe Schwaller, Heather J. Kulik, Haojun Jia, Huan Sun, Seyed Mohamad Moosavi, Chenru Duan,
• Abstract summary: Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly applied to scientific research, yet prevailing science benchmarks probe decontextualized knowledge.<n>We introduce a scenario-grounded benchmark that evaluates LLMs across biology, chemistry, materials, and physics.<n>The framework assesses models at two levels: (i) question-level accuracy on scenario-tied items and (ii) project-level performance.
• Score: 91.732562776782
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly applied to scientific research, yet prevailing science benchmarks probe decontextualized knowledge and overlook the iterative reasoning, hypothesis generation, and observation interpretation that drive scientific discovery. We introduce a scenario-grounded benchmark that evaluates LLMs across biology, chemistry, materials, and physics, where domain experts define research projects of genuine interest and decompose them into modular research scenarios from which vetted questions are sampled. The framework assesses models at two levels: (i) question-level accuracy on scenario-tied items and (ii) project-level performance, where models must propose testable hypotheses, design simulations or experiments, and interpret results. Applying this two-phase scientific discovery evaluation (SDE) framework to state-of-the-art LLMs reveals a consistent performance gap relative to general science benchmarks, diminishing return of scaling up model sizes and reasoning, and systematic weaknesses shared across top-tier models from different providers. Large performance variation in research scenarios leads to changing choices of the best performing model on scientific discovery projects evaluated, suggesting all current LLMs are distant to general scientific "superintelligence". Nevertheless, LLMs already demonstrate promise in a great variety of scientific discovery projects, including cases where constituent scenario scores are low, highlighting the role of guided exploration and serendipity in discovery. This SDE framework offers a reproducible benchmark for discovery-relevant evaluation of LLMs and charts practical paths to advance their development toward scientific discovery.

Related papers

• FIRE-Bench: Evaluating Agents on the Rediscovery of Scientific Insights [63.32178443510396]
  We introduce FIRE-Bench (Full-cycle Insight Rediscovery Evaluation), a benchmark that evaluates agents through the rediscovery of established findings.<n>Even the strongest agents achieve limited rediscovery success (50 F1), exhibit high variance across runs, and display recurring failure modes in experimental design, execution, and evidence-based reasoning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-02T23:21:13Z)
• Probing Scientific General Intelligence of LLMs with Scientist-Aligned Workflows [203.3527268311731]
  We present an operational SGI definition grounded in the Practical Inquiry Model (PIM)<n>We operationalize it via four scientist-aligned tasks: deep research, idea generation, dry/wet experiments, and experimental reasoning.<n>Our PIM-grounded definition, workflow-centric benchmark, and empirical insights establish a foundation for AI systems that genuinely participate in scientific discovery.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-12-18T12:44:36Z)
• The Evolving Role of Large Language Models in Scientific Innovation: Evaluator, Collaborator, and Scientist [3.7803247326675162]
  Scientific innovation is undergoing a paradigm shift driven by the rapid advancement of Large Language Models (LLMs)<n>This survey proposes a comprehensive framework to categorize the evolving roles of LLMs in scientific innovation across three hierarchical levels: Evaluator, Collaborator, and Scientist.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-16T00:11:01Z)
• LLM-SRBench: A New Benchmark for Scientific Equation Discovery with Large Language Models [20.800445482814958]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have gained interest for their potential to leverage embedded scientific knowledge for hypothesis generation.<n>Existing benchmarks often rely on common equations that are susceptible to memorization by LLMs, leading to inflated performance metrics that do not reflect discovery.<n>In this paper, we introduce LLM-SRBench, a comprehensive benchmark with 239 challenging problems across four scientific domains.<n>Our benchmark comprises two main categories: LSR-Transform, which transforms common physical models into less common mathematical representations to test reasoning beyond memorized forms, and LSR- Synth, which introduces synthetic, discovery-driven problems requiring data-driven reasoning
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-14T17:00:13Z)
• ResearchBench: Benchmarking LLMs in Scientific Discovery via Inspiration-Based Task Decomposition [67.26124739345332]
  Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated potential in assisting scientific research, yet their ability to discover high-quality research hypotheses remains unexamined.<n>We introduce the first large-scale benchmark for evaluating LLMs with a near-sufficient set of sub-tasks of scientific discovery.<n>We develop an automated framework that extracts critical components - research questions, background surveys, inspirations, and hypotheses - from scientific papers.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-27T08:09:15Z)
• 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)
• A Comprehensive Survey of Scientific Large Language Models and Their Applications in Scientific Discovery [68.48094108571432]
  Large language models (LLMs) have revolutionized the way text and other modalities of data are handled. We aim to provide a more holistic view of the research landscape by unveiling cross-field and cross-modal connections between scientific LLMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-16T08:03:24Z)
• LLM and Simulation as Bilevel Optimizers: A New Paradigm to Advance Physical Scientific Discovery [141.39722070734737]
  We propose to enhance the knowledge-driven, abstract reasoning abilities of Large Language Models with the computational strength of simulations. We introduce Scientific Generative Agent (SGA), a bilevel optimization framework. We conduct experiments to demonstrate our framework's efficacy in law discovery and molecular design.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-16T03:04:10Z)
• Large Language Models are Zero Shot Hypothesis Proposers [17.612235393984744]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) hold a wealth of global and interdisciplinary knowledge that promises to break down information barriers. We construct a dataset consist of background knowledge and hypothesis pairs from biomedical literature. We evaluate the hypothesis generation capabilities of various top-tier instructed models in zero-shot, few-shot, and fine-tuning settings.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-10T10:03:49Z)

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.