Skip to content
aiqbench takeAI Research

aiqbench analysis

This study introduces "Reconstruction," a rigorous benchmark assessing whether large language models can infer the core research ideas of papers using only their pre-publication bibliographies under strict anti-leakage protocols. Results indicate that while frontier models struggle to recover true hypotheses individually, multi-agent pipelines employing cross-model review and tournament selection significantly improve match rates across six scientific domains without external search tools. The findings highlight current limitations in reasoning from citations alone but demonstrate the potential of collaborative agent architectures for hypothesis generation based on limited textual evidence.
Source coveringarXiv
What this isA model's reading of the article and related coverage, written for aiqbench. Not the publisher's words.

Reconstruction: A Blind Benchmark for Recovering Research Ideas from Pre-Publication Bibliographies

arXiv2 min read

arXiv:2608.16645v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Can a language model recover the true research idea of a published paper when given only that paper's pre-publication bibliography? We introduce Reconstruction, a blind idea-recovery benchmark that withholds the seed paper and all contemporaneous or future literature, and asks models to propose hypotheses that an independent large language model judge matches against the held-out ground-truth idea. A strict anti-leakage protocol-temporal citation cutoff, anonymous reference IDs, and frozen per-paper bibliographies, which prevents prompt-time leakage of the seed idea. Across six scientific domains and 643 evaluated papers, seven frontier models achieve only modest Match rates (approx. 3-15%). We then evaluate a reference-only multi-agent (top 4) pipeline that combines cross-model review with a Swiss tournament over aligned hypothesis slots, without external web search. Cross-model review plus tournament selection raises Match rates to approx. 23-42% across all six domains, which is an observed approx. 2.4x lift over the best single-model baseline. This draft reports the protocol, anti-leakage design, and current results as an arXiv timestamp.

Abstract:Can a language model recover the true research idea of a published paper when given only that paper's pre-publication bibliography? We introduce Reconstruction, a blind idea-recovery benchmark that withholds the seed paper and all contemporaneous or future literature, and asks models to propose hypotheses that an independent large language model judge matches against the held-out ground-truth idea. A strict anti-leakage protocol-temporal citation cutoff, anonymous reference IDs, and frozen per-paper bibliographies, which prevents prompt-time leakage of the seed idea. Across six scientific domains and 643 evaluated papers, seven frontier models achieve only modest Match rates (approx. 3-15%). We then evaluate a reference-only multi-agent (top 4) pipeline that combines cross-model review with a Swiss tournament over aligned hypothesis slots, without external web search. Cross-model review plus tournament selection raises Match rates to approx. 23-42% across all six domains, which is an observed approx. 2.4x lift over the best single-model baseline. This draft reports the protocol, anti-leakage design, and current results as an arXiv timestamp.

Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI); Computation and Language (cs.CL); Multiagent Systems (cs.MA)

arXiv:2608.16645 [cs.AI]

(or arXiv:2608.16645v1 [cs.AI] for this version)

https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2608.16645 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)

arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.

Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.

Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.

Full text under the publisher's open licence · 263 words

Related coverage