ForeSci: Evaluating LLM Agents for Forward-Looking AI Research Judgment

arXiv:2606.00644v3 Announce Type: replace Abstract: AI research often requires decisions before future evidence exists: which bottleneck to attack, which direction to pursue, or where a project should be positioned. We introduce ForeSci, a temporally controlled benchmark for evaluating whether LLM agents can make such forward-looking research judgements from historical evidence. ForeSci contains 500 tasks across four fast-moving AI domains and four decision families. Each task is paired with a cutoff-aligned offline knowledge base; post-cutoff papers are hidden during generation and used only for validation. To avoid random future-event prediction, tasks are derived from pre-cutoff taxonomy branches and evidence signals, while generation-time retrieval and tools are restricted to the cutoff-aligned evidence package. We evaluate native LLMs, Hybrid RAG, and three research-agent adaptations across four backbones. Agent-based methods improve traceability over Hybrid RAG, while their gains in future-target alignment over native LLMs are modest and task dependent. Diagnostics reveal a recurring evidence-decision decoupling: agents may cite relevant evidence while forecasting the wrong research object. Task-specific checks between evidence and final decision reduce drift and improve future-target alignment. As research agents move from assisting known tasks to shaping open research directions, ForeSci offers a first controlled step toward measuring whether their judgement can be trusted to guide that future.

Abstract:AI research often requires decisions before future evidence exists: which bottleneck to attack, which direction to pursue, or where a project should be positioned. We introduce ForeSci, a temporally controlled benchmark for evaluating whether LLM agents can make such forward-looking research judgements from historical evidence. ForeSci contains 500 tasks across four fast-moving AI domains and four decision families. Each task is paired with a cutoff-aligned offline knowledge base; post-cutoff papers are hidden during generation and used only for validation. To avoid random future-event prediction, tasks are derived from pre-cutoff taxonomy branches and evidence signals, while generation-time retrieval and tools are restricted to the cutoff-aligned evidence package. We evaluate native LLMs, Hybrid RAG, and three research-agent adaptations across four backbones. Agent-based methods improve traceability over Hybrid RAG, while their gains in future-target alignment over native LLMs are modest and task dependent. Diagnostics reveal a recurring evidence-decision decoupling: agents may cite relevant evidence while forecasting the wrong research object. Task-specific checks between evidence and final decision reduce drift and improve future-target alignment. As research agents move from assisting known tasks to shaping open research directions, ForeSci offers a first controlled step toward measuring whether their judgement can be trusted to guide that future.

Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI)

arXiv:2606.00644 [cs.AI]

(or arXiv:2606.00644v3 [cs.AI] for this version)

https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2606.00644 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.

analiza aiqbench

ForeSci: Evaluating LLM Agents for Forward-Looking AI Research Judgment

Subiecte conexe