It's not the Language Model, it's the Tool: Deterministic Mediation for Scientific Workflows

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.13245v1
• Date: Wed, 13 May 2026 09:30:56 GMT
• Title: It's not the Language Model, it's the Tool: Deterministic Mediation for Scientific Workflows
• Abstract summary: Language models can produce convincing scientific analyses, but repeated generations on the same data do not guarantee the same result.<n>We propose typed mediation, a pattern in which the model orchestrates deterministic tools rather than generating analytical code.<n>We deploy this pattern on two instruments serving users over approximately six months, with very positive user feedback.
• Score: 0.27998963147546146
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Language models can produce convincing scientific analyses, but repeated generations on the same data do not guarantee the same result. A researcher may regenerate an identical query and receive a different fit, a different peak position or a different analysis procedure, without an obvious way to decide which output to trust. We propose typed mediation, a pattern in which the model orchestrates deterministic tools rather than generating analytical code. Each tool encodes one researcher's exact procedure for one instrument, ported through structured interviews. The model selects which tool to call and with what parameters. The tool produces the result. Regeneration does not change it. We evaluate this claim by running the same photoluminescence analysis on four platforms, including three commercial foundation models, four times each with the same prompt. The typed tool produces identical results across all runs. The commercial platforms either vary in numerical output and analytical methodology across runs, or fail to produce valid results on the task. We deploy this pattern on two instruments serving users over approximately six months, with very positive user feedback. Both cases are very challenging: they involve proprietary binary formats and per-seat licensed software, which force the tool to remain on local infrastructure alongside the data and the instrument it operates. We argue that deployment topology is not just a preference, but a structural requirement of scientific tool mediation. The result is a practical pattern for deploying language models in scientific workflows where reproducibility is mandatory, reducing analysis time from weeks to minutes while guaranteeing identical outputs across runs.

Related papers

• Is Code Better Than Language for Algorithmic Reasoning [58.86873062890482]
  We show that for tool-augmented language models, comparing natural-language reasoning with code-execution pipelines is difficult because the comparison changes both the intermediate representation and the execution mechanism.<n>We separate these factors with an intermediate intervention: the model expresses its reasoning as executable code, and the language model simulates that code in context to produce an answer.<n>We observe that the intermediate intervention is not meaningfully different from natural-language reasoning (+0.15pp)
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-14T04:17:21Z)
• Model-Adaptive Tool Necessity Reveals the Knowing-Doing Gap in LLM Tool Use [47.29360932085394]
  Large language models (LLMs) increasingly act as autonomous agents that must decide when to answer directly vs. when to invoke external tools.<n>We introduce a model-adaptive definition of tool-necessity, grounded in each model's empirical performance.<n>We find substantial mismatches of 26.5-54.0% and 30.8-41.8%, respectively.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-13T18:59:28Z)
• Less Is More: Measuring How LLM Involvement affects Chatbot Accuracy in Static Analysis [2.335152769484958]
  Large language models are increasingly used to make static analysis tools accessible through natural language.<n>We compare three architectures along a spectrum of LLM involvement for translating natural language to Joern's query language cpgql<n>These are evaluated on a benchmark of 20 code analysis tasks across three complexity tiers.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-23T14:51:18Z)
• When to Trust Tools? Adaptive Tool Trust Calibration For Tool-Integrated Math Reasoning [58.75883713573783]
  Tool-Integrated Reasoning has emerged as a promising paradigm that incorporates tool call and execution within the reasoning trajectory.<n>We find that when the reasoning of the model conflicts with the tool results, the model tends to believe in its own reasoning.<n>We introduce Adaptive Tool Trust (ATTC), a framework that guides the model to adaptively choose to trust or ignore the tool results.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-09T14:14:37Z)
• On the Limitations of Combining Sentiment Analysis Tools in a Cross-Platform Setting [2.3818760805173342]
  We analyze a combination of three sentiment analysis tools in a voting classifier according to their reliability and performance.<n>The results indicate that this kind of combination of tools is a good choice in the within-platform setting.<n>However, a majority vote does not necessarily lead to better results when applying in cross-platform domains.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-10T16:51:51Z)
• Pointwise Mutual Information as a Performance Gauge for Retrieval-Augmented Generation [78.28197013467157]
  We show that the pointwise mutual information between a context and a question is an effective gauge for language model performance.<n>We propose two methods that use the pointwise mutual information between a document and a question as a gauge for selecting and constructing prompts that lead to better performance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-12T13:14:09Z)
• ControlLLM: Augment Language Models with Tools by Searching on Graphs [97.62758830255002]
  We present ControlLLM, a novel framework that enables large language models (LLMs) to utilize multi-modal tools for solving real-world tasks. Our framework comprises three key components: (1) a textittask decomposer that breaks down a complex task into clear subtasks with well-defined inputs and outputs; (2) a textitThoughts-on-Graph (ToG) paradigm that searches the optimal solution path on a pre-built tool graph; and (3) an textitexecution engine with a rich toolbox that interprets the solution path and runs the
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-26T21:57:21Z)
• Super-Prompting: Utilizing Model-Independent Contextual Data to Reduce Data Annotation Required in Visual Commonsense Tasks [3.42658286826597]
  We analyze different prompt-based fine-tuning techniques to improve results on both language and multimodal causal transformer models. Our results show that by simple model-agnostic prompt-based fine-tuning, comparable results can be reached by only using 35%-40% of the fine-tuning training dataset.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-04-25T18:56:55Z)
• Visualizing the Relationship Between Encoded Linguistic Information and Task Performance [53.223789395577796]
  We study the dynamic relationship between the encoded linguistic information and task performance from the viewpoint of Pareto Optimality. We conduct experiments on two popular NLP tasks, i.e., machine translation and language modeling, and investigate the relationship between several kinds of linguistic information and task performances. Our empirical findings suggest that some syntactic information is helpful for NLP tasks whereas encoding more syntactic information does not necessarily lead to better performance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-03-29T19:03:10Z)
• Fine-Tuning Data Structures for Analytical Query Processing [0.5156484100374058]
  We introduce a framework for automatically choosing data structures to support efficient computation of analytical workloads. We introduce a novel low-level intermediate language that can express the algorithms behind various query processing paradigms. We show that the performance of the code generated by our framework either outperforms or is on par with the state-of-the-art analytical query engines.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-12-24T16:36:35Z)
• Interpretable Multi-dataset Evaluation for Named Entity Recognition [110.64368106131062]
  We present a general methodology for interpretable evaluation for the named entity recognition (NER) task. The proposed evaluation method enables us to interpret the differences in models and datasets, as well as the interplay between them. By making our analysis tool available, we make it easy for future researchers to run similar analyses and drive progress in this area.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-11-13T10:53:27Z)

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.