SearcharxivSearch

arXiv · 2512.16969

Probing Scientific General Intelligence of LLMs with Scientist-Aligned Workflows

Abstract

Despite advances in scientific AI, a coherent framework for Scientific General Intelligence (SGI)-the ability to autonomously conceive, investigate, and reason across scientific domains-remains lacking. We present an operational SGI definition grounded in the Practical Inquiry Model (PIM: Deliberation, Conception, Action, Perception) and operationalize it via four scientist-aligned tasks: deep research, idea generation, dry/wet experiments, and experimental reasoning. SGI-Bench comprises over 1,000 expert-curated, cross-disciplinary samples inspired by Science's 125 Big Questions, enabling systematic evaluation of state-of-the-art LLMs. Results reveal gaps: low exact match (10--20%) in deep research despite step-level alignment; ideas lacking feasibility and detail; high code executability but low execution result accuracy in dry experiments; low sequence fidelity in wet protocols; and persistent multimodal comparative-reasoning challenges. We further introduce Test-Time Reinforcement Learning (TTRL), which optimizes retrieval-augmented novelty rewards at inference, enhancing hypothesis novelty without reference answer. Together, our PIM-grounded definition, workflow-centric benchmark, and empirical insights establish a foundation for AI systems that genuinely participate in scientific discovery.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Wanghan Xu, Yuhao Zhou, Yifan Zhou, Qinglong Cao, Shuo Li, Jia Bu, Bo Liu, Yixin Chen, Xuming He, Xiangyu Zhao, Xiang Zhuang, Fengxiang Wang, Zhiwang Zhou, Qiantai Feng, Wenxuan Huang, Jiaqi Wei, Hao Wu, Yuejin Yang, Guangshuai Wang, Sheng Xu, Ziyan Huang, Xinyao Liu, Jiyao Liu, Cheng Tang, Wei Li, Ying Chen, Junzhi Ning, Pengfei Jiang, Chenglong Ma, Ye Du, Changkai Ji, Huihui Xu, Ming Hu, Jiangbin Zheng, Xin Chen, Yucheng Wu, Feifei Jiang, Xi Chen, Xiangru Tang, Yuchen Fu, Yingzhou Lu, Yuanyuan Zhang, Lihao Sun, Chengbo Li, Jinzhe Ma, Wanhao Liu, Yating Liu, Kuo-Cheng Wu, Shengdu Chai, Yizhou Wang, Ouwen Zhangjin, Chen Tang, Shufei Zhang, Wenbo Cao, Junjie Ren, Taoyong Cui, Zhouheng Yao, Juntao Deng, Yijie Sun, Feng Liu, Wangxu Wei, Jingyi Xu, Zhangrui Li, Junchao Gong, Zijie Guo, Zhiyu Yao, Zaoyu Chen, Tianhao Peng, Fangchen Yu, Bo Zhang, Dongzhan Zhou, Shixiang Tang, Jiaheng Liu, Fenghua Ling, Yan Lu, Yuchen Ren, Ben Fei, Zhen Zhao, Xinyu Gu, Rui Su, Xiao-Ming Wu, Weikang Si, Yang Liu, Hao Chen, Xiangchao Yan, Xue Yang, Junchi Yan, Jiamin Wu, Qihao Zheng, Chenhui Li, Zhiqiang Gao, Hao Kong, Junjun He, Mao Su, Tianfan Fu, Peng Ye, Chunfeng Song, Nanqing Dong, Yuqiang Li, Huazhu Fu. 2025-12-18. Probing Scientific General Intelligence of LLMs with Scientist-Aligned Workflows. https://arxiv.org/abs/2512.16969

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

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

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

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

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