Human-AI Collaboration for Estimating Scientific Replicability

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.27394v1
• Date: Sun, 19 Apr 2026 14:32:01 GMT
• Title: Human-AI Collaboration for Estimating Scientific Replicability
• Abstract summary: We introduce a hybrid prediction market in which algorithmic agents trade alongside human participants.<n>Agents are trained on outcomes from hundreds of prior replication studies while human participants contribute domain knowledge.<n>Our results show that, except for a few cases, hybrid markets match or outperform artificial prediction markets.
• Score: 9.157610685256163
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Determining whether published scientific findings can successfully be replicated is a long-standing challenge in the empirical sciences. Existing approaches for replicability assessment typically rely either on human judgment, i.e., creative assembly of human experts, or on machine learning models trained on paper content metadata. While both approaches have demonstrated value, each also has important limitations. Human forecasts can be influenced by cognitive biases and narrow exposure to the research literature, while automated assessments often struggle to capture contextual cues and subtle signals of credibility. In this paper, we examine a hybrid approach. Specifically, we introduce a hybrid prediction market in which algorithmic agents trade alongside human participants to jointly estimate the likelihood that a published scientific finding will be corroborated via the outcome of a controlled replication study. Agents are trained on outcomes from hundreds of prior replication studies while human participants contribute domain knowledge through real-time trading. We evaluate this hybrid approach through multiple live experiments involving participants from different academic disciplines and compare its performance to artificial-only and human-only baselines. Our results show that, except for a few cases, hybrid markets match or outperform artificial prediction markets, producing more accurate and reliable replication forecasts.

Related papers

• This human study did not involve human subjects: Validating LLM simulations as behavioral evidence [15.56427716190418]
  Heuristic approaches seek to establish that simulated and observed human behavior are interchangeable.<n> statistical calibration combines auxiliary human data with statistical adjustments to account for discrepancies between observed and simulated responses.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-17T18:18:38Z)
• The Story is Not the Science: Execution-Grounded Evaluation of Mechanistic Interpretability Research [56.80927148740585]
  We address the challenges of scalability and rigor by flipping the dynamic and developing AI agents as research evaluators.<n>We use mechanistic interpretability research as a testbed, build standardized research output, and develop MechEvalAgent.<n>Our work demonstrates the potential of AI agents to transform research evaluation and pave the way for rigorous scientific practices.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-05T19:00:02Z)
• Large language models replicate and predict human cooperation across experiments in game theory [0.8166364251367626]
  How closely large language models mirror actual human decision-making remains poorly understood.<n>We develop a digital twin of game-theoretic experiments and introduce a systematic prompting and probing framework for machine-behavioral evaluation.<n>We find that Llama reproduces human cooperation patterns with high fidelity, capturing human deviations from rational choice theory.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-11-06T16:21:27Z)
• Operationalizing Serendipity: Multi-Agent AI Workflows for Enhanced Materials Characterization with Theory-in-the-Loop [0.0]
  SciLink is an open-source, multi-agent artificial intelligence framework designed to operationalize serendipity in materials research.<n>It creates a direct, automated link between experimental observation, novelty assessment, and theoretical simulations.<n>We show its application to atomic-resolution and hyperspectral data, its capacity to integrate real-time human expert guidance, and its ability to close the research loop.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-07T04:59:17Z)
• Using Large Language Models to Create AI Personas for Replication, Generalization and Prediction of Media Effects: An Empirical Test of 133 Published Experimental Research Findings [0.3749861135832072]
  This report analyzes the potential for large language models (LLMs) to expedite accurate replication and generalization of published research about message effects in marketing.<n>LLMs were tested by replicating 133 experimental findings from 14 papers containing 45 recent studies published in the Journal of Marketing.<n>The LLM replications successfully reproduced 76% of the original main effects (84 out of 111), demonstrating strong potential for AI-assisted replication.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-28T18:14:39Z)
• 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.<n>ResearchAgent automatically defines novel problems, proposes methods and designs experiments, while iteratively refining them.<n>We experimentally validate our ResearchAgent on scientific publications across multiple disciplines.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-11T13:36:29Z)
• ChatEval: Towards Better LLM-based Evaluators through Multi-Agent Debate [57.71597869337909]
  We build a multi-agent referee team called ChatEval to autonomously discuss and evaluate the quality of generated responses from different models. Our analysis shows that ChatEval transcends mere textual scoring, offering a human-mimicking evaluation process for reliable assessments.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-08-14T15:13:04Z)
• Empirical Estimates on Hand Manipulation are Recoverable: A Step Towards Individualized and Explainable Robotic Support in Everyday Activities [80.37857025201036]
  Key challenge for robotic systems is to figure out the behavior of another agent. Processing correct inferences is especially challenging when (confounding) factors are not controlled experimentally. We propose equipping robots with the necessary tools to conduct observational studies on people.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-01-27T22:15:56Z)
• Test-time Collective Prediction [73.74982509510961]
  Multiple parties in machine learning want to jointly make predictions on future test points. Agents wish to benefit from the collective expertise of the full set of agents, but may not be willing to release their data or model parameters. We explore a decentralized mechanism to make collective predictions at test time, leveraging each agent's pre-trained model.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-06-22T18:29:58Z)
• Human Trajectory Forecasting in Crowds: A Deep Learning Perspective [89.4600982169]
  We present an in-depth analysis of existing deep learning-based methods for modelling social interactions. We propose two knowledge-based data-driven methods to effectively capture these social interactions. We develop a large scale interaction-centric benchmark TrajNet++, a significant yet missing component in the field of human trajectory forecasting.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-07-07T17:19:56Z)

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.