Searcharxiv⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2509.02661

The Future of Artificial Intelligence and the Mathematical and Physical Sciences (AI+MPS)

Andrew Ferguson·Marisa LaFleur·Lars Ruthotto·Jesse Thaler·Yuan-Sen Ting·Pratyush Tiwary·Soledad Villar·E. Paulo Alves·Jeremy Avigad·Simon Billinge·Camille Bilodeau·Keith Brown·Emmanuel Candes·Arghya Chattopadhyay·Bingqing Cheng·Jonathan Clausen·Connor Coley·Andrew Connolly·Fred Daum·Sijia Dong·Chrisy Xiyu Du·Cora Dvorkin·Cristiano Fanelli·Eric B. Ford·Luis Manuel Frutos·Nicolás García Trillos·Cecilia Garraffo·Robert Ghrist·Rafael Gomez-Bombarelli·Gianluca Guadagni·Sreelekha Guggilam·Sergei Gukov·Juan B. Gutiérrez·Salman Habib·Johannes Hachmann·Boris Hanin·Philip Harris·Murray Holland·Elizabeth Holm·Hsin-Yuan Huang·Shih-Chieh Hsu·Nick Jackson·Olexandr Isayev·Heng Ji·Aggelos Katsaggelos·Jeremy Kepner·Yannis Kevrekidis·Michelle Kuchera·J. Nathan Kutz·Branislava Lalic·Ann Lee·Matt LeBlanc·Josiah Lim·Rebecca Lindsey·Yongmin Liu·Peter Y. Lu·Sudhir Malik·Vuk Mandic·Vidya Manian·Emeka P. Mazi·Pankaj Mehta·Peter Melchior·Brice Ménard·Jennifer Ngadiuba·Stella Offner·Elsa Olivetti·Shyue Ping Ong·Christopher Rackauckas·Philippe Rigollet·Chad Risko·Philip Romero·Grant Rotskoff·Brett Savoie·Uros Seljak·David Shih·Gary Shiu·Dima Shlyakhtenko·Eva Silverstein·Taylor Sparks·Thomas Strohmer·Christopher Stubbs·Stephen Thomas·Suriyanarayanan Vaikuntanathan·Rene Vidal·Francisco Villaescusa-Navarro·Gregory Voth·Benjamin Wandelt·Rachel Ward·Melanie Weber·Risa Wechsler·Stephen Whitelam·Olaf Wiest·Mike Williams·Zhuoran Yang·Yaroslava G. Yingling·Bin Yu·Shuwen Yue·Ann Zabludoff·Huimin Zhao·Tong Zhang
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

This community paper developed out of the NSF Workshop on the Future of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and the Mathematical and Physics Sciences (MPS), which was held in March 2025 with the goal of understanding how the MPS domains (Astronomy, Chemistry, Materials Research, Mathematical Sciences, and Physics) can best capitalize on, and contribute to, the future of AI. We present here a summary and snapshot of the MPS community's perspective, as of Spring/Summer 2025, in a rapidly developing field. The link between AI and MPS is becoming increasingly inextricable; now is a crucial moment to strengthen the link between AI and Science by pursuing a strategy that proactively and thoughtfully leverages the potential of AI for scientific discovery and optimizes opportunities to impact the development of AI by applying concepts from fundamental science. To achieve this, we propose activities and strategic priorities that: (1) enable AI+MPS research in both directions; (2) build up an interdisciplinary community of AI+MPS researchers; and (3) foster education and workforce development in AI for MPS researchers and students. We conclude with a summary of suggested priorities for funding agencies, educational institutions, and individual researchers to help position the MPS community to be a leader in, and take full advantage of, the transformative potential of AI+MPS.

Explore related subjects

cs.AIastro-ph.IMcond-mat.mtrl-scics.LGphysics.data-anstat.ML

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Andrew Ferguson, Marisa LaFleur, Lars Ruthotto, Jesse Thaler, Yuan-Sen Ting, Pratyush Tiwary, Soledad Villar, E. Paulo Alves, Jeremy Avigad, Simon Billinge, Camille Bilodeau, Keith Brown, Emmanuel Candes, Arghya Chattopadhyay, Bingqing Cheng, Jonathan Clausen, Connor Coley, Andrew Connolly, Fred Daum, Sijia Dong, Chrisy Xiyu Du, Cora Dvorkin, Cristiano Fanelli, Eric B. Ford, Luis Manuel Frutos, Nicolás García Trillos, Cecilia Garraffo, Robert Ghrist, Rafael Gomez-Bombarelli, Gianluca Guadagni, Sreelekha Guggilam, Sergei Gukov, Juan B. Gutiérrez, Salman Habib, Johannes Hachmann, Boris Hanin, Philip Harris, Murray Holland, Elizabeth Holm, Hsin-Yuan Huang, Shih-Chieh Hsu, Nick Jackson, Olexandr Isayev, Heng Ji, Aggelos Katsaggelos, Jeremy Kepner, Yannis Kevrekidis, Michelle Kuchera, J. Nathan Kutz, Branislava Lalic, Ann Lee, Matt LeBlanc, Josiah Lim, Rebecca Lindsey, Yongmin Liu, Peter Y. Lu, Sudhir Malik, Vuk Mandic, Vidya Manian, Emeka P. Mazi, Pankaj Mehta, Peter Melchior, Brice Ménard, Jennifer Ngadiuba, Stella Offner, Elsa Olivetti, Shyue Ping Ong, Christopher Rackauckas, Philippe Rigollet, Chad Risko, Philip Romero, Grant Rotskoff, Brett Savoie, Uros Seljak, David Shih, Gary Shiu, Dima Shlyakhtenko, Eva Silverstein, Taylor Sparks, Thomas Strohmer, Christopher Stubbs, Stephen Thomas, Suriyanarayanan Vaikuntanathan, Rene Vidal, Francisco Villaescusa-Navarro, Gregory Voth, Benjamin Wandelt, Rachel Ward, Melanie Weber, Risa Wechsler, Stephen Whitelam, Olaf Wiest, Mike Williams, Zhuoran Yang, Yaroslava G. Yingling, Bin Yu, Shuwen Yue, Ann Zabludoff, Huimin Zhao, Tong Zhang. 2025-09-02. The Future of Artificial Intelligence and the Mathematical and Physical Sciences (AI+MPS). https://doi.org/10.1088/2632-2153/ae3e4e

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

Decoupling Readiness from Release for Tail-Aware Scheduling of Agentic LLM Workflows

Agentic LLM workflows consist of sequences of model turns interleaved with tool interactions, so their end-to-end completion time depends not only on inference speed but also on when ready turns are released. Most runtimes release each turn immediately upon readiness. Under contention, this eager release policy can accumulate released but unfinished work; once submitted, those turns can no longer be reordered by the workflow-level policy, increasing tail latency. We present a tail-risk-aware turn release scheduling method that jointly decides which ready turn to release next and how much released but unfinished work to maintain. The method uses a mean--Conditional Value-at-Risk (CVaR) objective to capture the evolving tail risk of unfinished workflows, incorporates online estimates of turn work when prioritizing ready turns, and adapts the released work budget to observed queue pressure. We evaluate the method using real agent execution traces from software engineering tasks across multiple LLMs and workflow arrival rates. The method performs comparably to eager release under light load and substantially reduces the P95 of workflow flow time under contention, achieving up to a \(3.50\times\) speedup.

cs.AI↗
arXiv2026

Demystifying the Privacy-Utility Trade-off in LLM Interactions

The integration of Large Language Models into daily tasks relies on context-rich instructions, inevitably exposing sensitive user information. Current privacy-preserving methods typically employ context-agnostic static rules, causing severe utility degradation. However, the specific mechanisms governing how sanitization impacts downstream performance remain largely underexplored. To address this, we conduct a systematic analysis to deconstruct the privacy-utility trade-off, uncovering three underlying mechanisms: (1) Context-Dependent Utility, which first establishes when to sanitize by revealing that data value shifts from critical constraints to dispensable noise based on user intent; (2) Strategic Adaptation, which subsequently determines how to sanitize by dictating that the choice between removal and replacement depends on the task's reliance on factual integrity versus structural coherence; and (3) Combinatorial Interplay, which finally extends the protection scope by demonstrating that attributes form a semantic web of synergistic dependencies or antagonistic redundancies. Guided by these insights, we introduce an intent-driven local protection framework. By distilling a lightweight model Veilmind-4B to drive a dynamic extraction-sanitization-restoration pipeline, our approach reaches a low-leakage privacy point while preserving substantially higher response utility than existing privacy-oriented baselines, advancing the privacy-utility trade-off toward the Pareto frontier.

cs.AI↗
arXiv2026

Defining AI Agents: A Compendium of Criteria, Metrics, and Benchmarks

The term agent in artificial intelligence lacks a standard definition, complicating the evaluation, comparison, and reproducibility of AI agent research. We address this ambiguity through a survey organized around five dimensions of agenticness: environmental interaction, learning and adaptation, autonomy, goal-directed behavior, and temporal coherence. For each dimension, we examine how the underlying capability has been conceptualized across prior work and synthesize the metrics, benchmarks, and evaluation frameworks used to assess it. This review provides a structured account of the current landscape of agent evaluation, highlighting both established approaches and areas where evaluation remains limited or inconsistent. We additionally introduce the Agent Compendium, a public-facing digital resource that organizes and extends the evaluation methods identified through this review. Together, the survey and compendium provide a common structure for evaluating and comparing agent capabilities across AI systems, supporting more reproducible research, clearer communication, and more systematic study of artificial agents.

cs.AI↗