AutoResearchBench: Benchmarking AI Agents on Complex Scientific Literature Discovery

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.25256v1
• Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2026 06:05:17 GMT
• Title: AutoResearchBench: Benchmarking AI Agents on Complex Scientific Literature Discovery
• Abstract summary: AutoResearchBench is a benchmark for autonomous scientific literature discovery.<n>Compared to previous benchmarks on agentic web browsing, AutoResearchBench is research-oriented.<n>Even the most powerful LLMs, despite having largely conquered general agentic web-browsing benchmarks such as BrowseComp, achieve only 9.39% accuracy on Deep Research and 9.31% IoU on Wide Research.
• Score: 55.70879973230979
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/
• Abstract: Autonomous scientific research is significantly advanced thanks to the development of AI agents. One key step in this process is finding the right scientific literature, whether to explore existing knowledge for a research problem, or to acquire evidence for verifying assumptions and supporting claims. To assess AI agents' capability in driving this process, we present AutoResearchBench, a dedicated benchmark for autonomous scientific literature discovery. AutoResearchBench consists of two complementary task types: (1) Deep Research, which requires tracking down a specific target paper through a progressive, multi-step probing process, and (2) Wide Research, which requires comprehensively collecting a set of papers satisfying given conditions. Compared to previous benchmarks on agentic web browsing, AutoResearchBench is distinguished along three dimensions: it is research-oriented, calling for in-depth comprehension of scientific concepts; literature-focused, demanding fine-grained utilization of detailed information; and open-ended, involving an unknown number of qualified papers and thus requiring deliberate reasoning and search throughout. These properties make AutoResearchBench uniquely suited for evaluating autonomous research capabilities, and extraordinarily challenging. Even the most powerful LLMs, despite having largely conquered general agentic web-browsing benchmarks such as BrowseComp, achieve only 9.39% accuracy on Deep Research and 9.31% IoU on Wide Research, while many other strong baselines fall below 5%. We publicly release the dataset and evaluation pipeline to facilitate future research in this direction. We publicly release the dataset, evaluation pipeline, and code at https://github.com/CherYou/AutoResearchBench.

Related papers

• ScholarQuest: A Taxonomy-Guided Benchmark for Agentic Academic Paper Search in Open Literature Environments [44.35044790171568]
  We propose ScholarQuest, a large-scale, taxonomy-guided benchmark for agentic academic paper search.<n>It is constructed from over 1,000 computer science topics and four representative research intents, including method-oriented, setting-anchored, comparison-based, and scope-controlled queries.<n> Benchmarking results show that agentic methods outperform single-shot retrieval baselines, yet the best-performing agent achieves only 0.314 Recall@100 and 0.355 Recall@All, indicating substantial room for improvement.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-18T13:47:20Z)
• AgentIR: Reasoning-Aware Retrieval for Deep Research Agents [76.29382561831105]
  Deep Research agents generate explicit natural language reasoning before each search call.<n> Reasoning-Aware Retrieval embeds the agent's reasoning trace alongside its query.<n>DR- Synth generates Deep Research retriever training data from standard QA datasets.<n>AgentIR-4B achieves 68% accuracy with the open-weight agent Tongyi-DeepResearch.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-04T18:47:26Z)
• Can Deep Research Agents Find and Organize? Evaluating the Synthesis Gap with Expert Taxonomies [57.11324429385405]
  We introduce TaxoBench, a diagnostic benchmark derived from 72 computer science surveys.<n>We manually extract expert-authored taxonomy trees containing 3,815 precisely categorized citations as ground truth.<n>Best agent recalls only 20.9% of expert-selected papers, and even with perfect input, the best model achieves only 0.31 ARI in organization.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-18T11:57:09Z)
• Step-DeepResearch Technical Report [90.50586290399683]
  We introduce Step-DeepResearch, a cost-effective, end-to-end agent.<n>We propose a Data Synthesis Strategy Based on Atomic Capabilities to reinforce planning and report writing.<n>To bridge the evaluation gap in the Chinese domain, we establish ADR-Bench for realistic deep research scenarios.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-12-23T16:32:27Z)
• SciNetBench: A Relation-Aware Benchmark for Scientific Literature Retrieval Agents [12.057215000080705]
  We propose SciNetBench, the first Scientific Network Relation-aware Benchmark for literature retrieval agents.<n>Our benchmark systematically evaluates three levels of relations: ego-centric retrieval of papers with novel knowledge structures, pair-wise identification of scholarly relationships, and path-wise reconstruction of scientific evolutionary trajectories.<n>We find that their accuracy on relation-aware retrieval tasks often falls below 20%, revealing a core shortcoming of current retrieval paradigms.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-12-16T02:53:02Z)
• ReplicationBench: Can AI Agents Replicate Astrophysics Research Papers? [29.17900668495058]
  We introduce ReplicationBench, an evaluation framework for frontier AI agents.<n>It tests whether agents can replicate entire research papers drawn from the astrophysics literature.<n>R ReplicationBench establishes the first benchmark of paper-scale, expert-validated astrophysics research tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-28T16:21:19Z)
• AstaBench: Rigorous Benchmarking of AI Agents with a Scientific Research Suite [75.58737079136942]
  We present AstaBench, a suite that provides the first holistic measure of agentic ability to perform scientific research.<n>Our suite comes with the first scientific research environment with production-grade search tools.<n>Our evaluation of 57 agents across 22 agent classes reveals several interesting findings.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-24T17:10:26Z)
• ResearcherBench: Evaluating Deep AI Research Systems on the Frontiers of Scientific Inquiry [22.615102398311432]
  We introduce ResearcherBench, the first benchmark focused on evaluating the capabilities of deep AI research systems.<n>We compiled a dataset of 65 research questions expertly selected from real-world scientific scenarios.<n>OpenAI Deep Research and Gemini Deep Research significantly outperform other systems, with particular strength in open-ended consulting questions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-22T06:51:26Z)
• From Web Search towards Agentic Deep Research: Incentivizing Search with Reasoning Agents [96.65646344634524]
  Large Language Models (LLMs), endowed with reasoning and agentic capabilities, are ushering in a new paradigm termed Agentic Deep Research.<n>We trace the evolution from static web search to interactive, agent-based systems that plan, explore, and learn.<n>We demonstrate that Agentic Deep Research not only significantly outperforms existing approaches, but is also poised to become the dominant paradigm for future information seeking.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-23T17:27:19Z)
• DeepResearch Bench: A Comprehensive Benchmark for Deep Research Agents [30.768405850755602]
  DeepResearch Bench is a benchmark consisting of 100 PhD-level research tasks.<n> evaluating Deep Research Agents is inherently complex and labor-intensive.<n>We propose two novel methodologies that achieve strong alignment with human judgment.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-13T13:17:32Z)
• ResearchArena: Benchmarking Large Language Models' Ability to Collect and Organize Information as Research Agents [30.603079363363634]
  This study introduces ResearchArena, a benchmark designed to evaluate large language models' capabilities in conducting academic surveys.<n>ResearchArena models the process in three stages: (1) information discovery, identifying relevant literature; (2) information selection, evaluating papers' relevance and impact; and (3) information organization.<n>To support these evaluations, we construct an offline environment of 12M full-text academic papers and 7.9K survey papers.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-13T03:26:30Z)

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.