Measuring the Gap Between Human and LLM Research Ideas

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2607.01233v1
• Date: Wed, 01 Jul 2026 17:59:56 GMT
• Title: Measuring the Gap Between Human and LLM Research Ideas
• Abstract summary: We build an evaluation framework for ideation from high-quality human research papers.<n>For each paper, we reverse-engineer a small set of closely related prior works that likely inspired its core idea.<n>We introduce a two-axis research-taste taxonomy to profile each idea by its opportunity pattern and research paradigm.
• Score: 63.27812052187884
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: LLMs are increasingly used to brainstorm research ideas, but existing evaluations mostly judge individual ideas by novelty, feasibility, or expert preference. We instead ask: how far are current LLM-generated ideas from human researchers? To characterize this gap, we build a large-scale evaluation framework for ideation from high-quality human research papers. For each paper, we reverse-engineer a small set of closely related prior works that likely inspired its core idea. LLMs are then prompted to generate a new idea from the set of paper titles and summaries. We introduce a two-axis research-taste taxonomy to profile each idea by its opportunity pattern and research paradigm, and use it to quantify the divergence between human and LLM ideas. Across idea sets generated by different LLMs, we observe a consistent distributional gap: LLM ideas are disproportionately concentrated around bridge-like opportunities and synthesis methods, whereas the human paper reference distribution spreads more broadly across ways of framing gaps and constructing contributions. This result suggests that strong LLMs can produce a range of reasonable ideas, but that range remains narrower than, and systematically shifted relative to, human research taste.

Related papers

• AI and Its Impact on Creativity and Diversity: An Empirical Study of LLM-Generated Product Ideas [0.24629531282150877]
  This research examines how well large language models, or LLMs, generate new product ideas for college students priced under $50.<n>Our first study shows that LLM-generated product ideas have higher average quality than human ideas, based on purchase intent.<n>Our second study shows that this AI-induced creativity boost is not explained by the LLM's more persuasive pitching skills.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-07-30T00:55:25Z)
• Alien Science: Sampling Coherent but Cognitively Unavailable Research Directions from Idea Atoms [53.907293349123506]
  Large language models often fail at producing ideas that are both coherent and non-obvious to the current community.<n>We formalize this gap through cognitive availability, the likelihood that a research direction would be naturally proposed by a typical researcher.<n>We learn two complementary models: a coherence model that scores whether a set of atoms constitutes a viable direction, and an availability model that scores how likely that direction is to be generated.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-01T13:05:19Z)
• Examining and Addressing Barriers to Diversity in LLM-Generated Ideas [0.7009487789080344]
  Ideas generated by independent samples of humans tend to be more diverse than ideas generated from independent LLM samples.<n>These concerns raise concerns that widespread reliance on LLMs could homogenize ideation and undermine innovation at a societal level.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-23T23:10:47Z)
• LLM-REVal: Can We Trust LLM Reviewers Yet? [70.58742663985652]
  Large language models (LLMs) have inspired researchers to integrate them extensively into the academic workflow.<n>This study focuses on how the deep integration of LLMs into both peer-review and research processes may influence scholarly fairness.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-14T10:30:20Z)
• The Ideation-Execution Gap: Execution Outcomes of LLM-Generated versus Human Research Ideas [90.26363107905344]
  A good idea should not simply appear to be novel, it should also result in better research after being executed.<n>To test whether AI-generated ideas lead to better research outcomes, we conduct an execution study.<n>Comparing the review scores of the same ideas before and after execution, the scores of the LLM-generated ideas decrease significantly more than expert-written ideas.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-25T19:47:23Z)
• Chain of Ideas: Revolutionizing Research Via Novel Idea Development with LLM Agents [64.64280477958283]
  An exponential increase in scientific literature makes it challenging for researchers to stay current with recent advances and identify meaningful research directions. Recent developments in large language models(LLMs) suggest a promising avenue for automating the generation of novel research ideas. We propose a Chain-of-Ideas(CoI) agent, an LLM-based agent that organizes relevant literature in a chain structure to effectively mirror the progressive development in a research domain.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-17T03:26:37Z)
• Can LLMs Generate Novel Research Ideas? A Large-Scale Human Study with 100+ NLP Researchers [90.26363107905344]
  Large language models (LLMs) have sparked optimism about their potential to accelerate scientific discovery. No evaluations have shown that LLM systems can take the very first step of producing novel, expert-level ideas.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-06T08:25:03Z)

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.