Sari la conținut

Română · beta. Traducerea a fost făcută automat și este încă în curs de revizuire. Citește pagina în engleză

perspectiva aiqbenchMachine learning

analiza aiqbench

This study challenges the assumption that providing biological context improves LLM performance in autonomous lab optimization, finding instead that domain-agnostic prompts outperformed them in over 60% of tasks due to anchoring biases. The research demonstrates that specialized biology-aware capabilities do not transfer from general raw optimization training and may hinder a model's ability to adapt to feedback. Consequently, developers of closed-loop biological systems should treat domain-specific optimization as a distinct capability rather than an inherent benefit of contextual knowledge.
Surse care acoperăarXiv, Latent Space

Biological Context Does Not Reliably Improve LLM-Guided Experimental Optimization

arXiv3 min de cititArticolul și perspectiva sunt în engleză.

arXiv:2605.15341v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Autonomous labs increasingly deploy large language models (LLMs) as closedloop biology optimizers that propose a design, read the outcome, then propose again. This is partly because of an assumption that biological knowledge helps an LLM choose better designs than Bayesian optimization, which has no access to biological context. We test that assumption on 45 biology tasks reconstructed from 2,485 experimental rows across 341 published papers, scored by oracles fitted to those rows, each run over 30 iterations under two prompt conditions. The domain-aware condition provides the published parameter names, units, and labels, and the domain-agnostic renames them so they are not biologically meaningful, with search space and feedback identical. Across 19 LLMs domain-agnostic outperforms domain-aware on 58.7% of tasks by trajectory and 61.9% by endpoint. The failure is specific to biology, reversing on education tasks built the same way. Domain-aware prompting tends to help models propose better initial designs, while making them respond worse to feedback. Part of the reason is anchoring, with models keeping the conventional categorical choice even when the oracle scores a different (published best) value higher. Post-training Llama 3.1 8B to frontier-level raw optimization does not transfer to biology-aware optimization improvements. Biology-aware optimization therefore looks like a separate capability that autonomous laboratory loops should target directly.

Abstract:Autonomous labs increasingly deploy large language models (LLMs) as closedloop biology optimizers that propose a design, read the outcome, then propose again. This is partly because of an assumption that biological knowledge helps an LLM choose better designs than Bayesian optimization, which has no access to biological context. We test that assumption on 45 biology tasks reconstructed from 2,485 experimental rows across 341 published papers, scored by oracles fitted to those rows, each run over 30 iterations under two prompt conditions. The domain-aware condition provides the published parameter names, units, and labels, and the domain-agnostic renames them so they are not biologically meaningful, with search space and feedback identical. Across 19 LLMs domain-agnostic outperforms domain-aware on 58.7% of tasks by trajectory and 61.9% by endpoint. The failure is specific to biology, reversing on education tasks built the same way. Domain-aware prompting tends to help models propose better initial designs, while making them respond worse to feedback. Part of the reason is anchoring, with models keeping the conventional categorical choice even when the oracle scores a different (published best) value higher. Post-training Llama 3.1 8B to frontier-level raw optimization does not transfer to biology-aware optimization improvements. Biology-aware optimization therefore looks like a separate capability that autonomous laboratory loops should target directly.

Machine Learning (cs.LG); Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI)

arXiv:2605.15341 [cs.LG]

(or arXiv:2605.15341v2 [cs.LG] for this version)

https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2605.15341 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite

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.

Text integral sub licența deschisă a publicației · 305 cuvinte

Subiecte conexe