Budget-Sensitive Discovery Scoring: A Formally Verified Framework for Evaluating AI-Guided Scientific Selection

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2603.12349v1
• Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2026 18:09:53 GMT
• Title: Budget-Sensitive Discovery Scoring: A Formally Verified Framework for Evaluating AI-Guided Scientific Selection
• Abstract summary: Budget-Sensitive Discovery Score (BSDS) penalizes false discoveries at each budget level.<n>Discovery Quality Score (DQS) provides a single summary statistic that no proposer can inflate by performing well at a cherry-picked budget.<n> framework applies to any setting where candidates are selected under budget constraints and asymmetric error costs.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Scientific discovery increasingly relies on AI systems to select candidates for expensive experimental validation, yet no principled, budget-aware evaluation framework exists for comparing selection strategies -- a gap intensified by large language models (LLMs), which generate plausible scientific proposals without reliable downstream evaluation. We introduce the Budget-Sensitive Discovery Score (BSDS), a formally verified metric -- 20 theorems machine-checked by the Lean 4 proof assistant -- that jointly penalizes false discoveries (lambda-weighted FDR) and excessive abstention (gamma-weighted coverage gap) at each budget level. Its budget-averaged form, the Discovery Quality Score (DQS), provides a single summary statistic that no proposer can inflate by performing well at a cherry-picked budget. As a case study, we apply BSDS/DQS to: do LLMs add marginal value to an existing ML pipeline for drug discovery candidate selection? We evaluate 39 proposers -- 11 mechanistic variants, 14 zero-shot LLM configurations, and 14 few-shot LLM configurations -- using SMILES representations on MoleculeNet HIV (41,127 compounds, 3.5% active, 1,000 bootstrap replicates) under both random and scaffold splits. Three findings emerge. First, the simple RF-based Greedy-ML proposer achieves the best DQS (-0.046), outperforming all MLP variants and LLM configurations. Second, no LLM surpasses the Greedy-ML baseline under zero-shot or few-shot evaluation on HIV or Tox21, establishing that LLMs provide no marginal value over an existing trained classifier. Third, the proposer hierarchy generalizes across five MoleculeNet benchmarks spanning 0.18%-46.2% prevalence, a non-drug AV safety domain, and a 9x7 grid of penalty parameters (tau >= 0.636, mean tau = 0.863). The framework applies to any setting where candidates are selected under budget constraints and asymmetric error costs.

Related papers

• A-SR: Self-Evolving Agentic LLMs for Symbolic Regression via Hierarchical Coordination [51.06539604709775]
  We propose A-SR, a self-evolving agentic framework that shifts the control unit from expression edits to role-conditioned evidence views.<n>A-SR coordinates formula discovery through routing among coordination protocols, an online evaluator-reward role policy, and state-routed process memory.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-05T14:01:10Z)
• LLM-as-a-Verifier: A General-Purpose Verification Framework [74.40111651545979]
  We introduce LLM-as-a-Verifier, a general-purpose verification framework.<n>It provides fine-grained feedback for agentic tasks without requiring additional training.<n>It achieves state-of-the-art performance on several benchmarks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-07-06T17:59:35Z)
• Dictionaries, Not Darwin: Set-Level Selection Beats LLM Evolution in Scientific Equation Discovery [9.173232861966595]
  PTB-Search is a one-generation method for componentized scientific discovery.<n>It samples independent proposals once, extracts reusable terms into a per-problem dictionary, and performs train-only set-level sparse selection.<n>On identical dictionaries and zero additional LLM calls, set-level selectors solve 165-169 of 717 cells, while single-term reductions solve only 74--78.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-07-05T04:10:34Z)
• ComplexMCP: Evaluation of LLM Agents in Dynamic, Interdependent, and Large-Scale Tool Sandbox [61.862814740220806]
  $textbfComplexMCP$ is a benchmark designed to evaluate agents in rigorous conditions.<n>Built on the Model Context Protocol (MCP), $textbfComplexMCP$ provides over 300 meticulously tested tools.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-11T16:20:51Z)
• Unsolvability Ceiling in Multi-LLM Routing: An Empirical Study of Evaluation Artifacts [0.07812854697536452]
  We present a large-scale study of multi-tier LLM routing with 206,000 query-model pairs across six benchmarks.<n>We show that a substantial portion of reported unsolvability stems from evaluation artifacts.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-08T07:49:24Z)
• LLM Readiness Harness: Evaluation, Observability, and CI Gates for LLM/RAG Applications [51.56484100374058]
  We present a readiness harness for LLM and RAG applications that turns evaluation into a deployment decision workflow.<n>The system combines automated benchmarks, OpenTelemetry observability, and CI quality gates under a minimal API contract.<n>We evaluate the harness on ticket-routing and BEIR tasks with full Azure matrix coverage.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-28T18:03:32Z)
• Clotho: Measuring Task-Specific Pre-Generation Test Adequacy for LLM Inputs [6.862079218077768]
  Testing Large Language Models on specific tasks is difficult and costly.<n>A key challenge is to assess input adequacy in a way that reflects the demands of the task.<n>We introduce CLOTHO, a task-specific, pre-generation adequacy measure.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-22T02:34:09Z)
• Conformal P-Value in Multiple-Choice Question Answering Tasks with Provable Risk Control [0.0]
  This study introduces a significance testing-enhanced conformal prediction (CP) framework to improve trustworthiness of large language models (LLMs) in multiple-choice question answering (MCQA)<n>CP provides statistically rigorous marginal coverage guarantees for prediction sets, and significance testing offers established statistical rigor.<n>This work establishes a statistical framework for trustworthy LLM deployment in high-stakes QA applications.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-07T16:46:47Z)
• Generative Verifiers: Reward Modeling as Next-Token Prediction [29.543787728397643]
  We propose training verifiers using the ubiquitous next-token prediction objective, jointly on verification and solution generation.<n>Compared to standard verifiers, such generative verifiers (GenRM) can benefit from several advantages of LLMs.<n>We observe improvements of 28% $rightarrow$ 44.6% on MATH, and 37.9% $rightarrow$ 53.5% on MMLU abstract algebra.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-27T17:57:45Z)
• SORRY-Bench: Systematically Evaluating Large Language Model Safety Refusal [64.9938658716425]
  SORRY-Bench is a proposed benchmark for evaluating large language models' (LLMs) ability to recognize and reject unsafe user requests.<n>First, existing methods often use coarse-grained taxonomy of unsafe topics, and are over-representing some fine-grained topics.<n>Second, linguistic characteristics and formatting of prompts are often overlooked, like different languages, dialects, and more -- which are only implicitly considered in many evaluations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-20T17:56:07Z)
• Improving Zero-shot LLM Re-Ranker with Risk Minimization [20.32406191251512]
  In the Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) system, advanced Large Language Models (LLMs) have emerged as effective Query Likelihood Models (QLMs) in an unsupervised way.<n>However, directly prompting LLMs to approximate QLMs inherently is biased, where the estimated distribution might diverge from the actual document-specific distribution.<n>We introduce a novel framework, $mathrmUR3$, which leverages Bayesian decision theory to both quantify and mitigate this estimation bias.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-19T08:29:54Z)
• How Far Are We on the Decision-Making of LLMs? Evaluating LLMs' Gaming Ability in Multi-Agent Environments [83.78240828340681]
  GAMA($gamma$)-Bench is a new framework for evaluating Large Language Models' Gaming Ability in Multi-Agent environments.<n>$gamma$-Bench includes eight classical game theory scenarios and a dynamic scoring scheme specially designed to assess LLMs' performance.<n>Our results indicate GPT-3.5 demonstrates strong robustness but limited generalizability, which can be enhanced using methods like Chain-of-Thought.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-18T14:04:47Z)

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.