analiza aiqbench
This paper introduces a benchmark for open-ended hypothesis discovery, where an agent gets only a large tabular dataset and an outcome, and must find data-supported mechanisms without being told which variables matter. The benchmark uses hidden structural causal models with 351 planted hypotheses, so proposed findings can be checked through interventions. HypAgent scores 0.49 F1 against 0.35 for the strongest baseline, and the authors find that many failures come from getting the functional form or conditions of a mechanism wrong after the relevant variable has already been found. Readers should note that the results are on a synthetic benchmark, so real-world performance remains untested.
Searching for What Matters: Open-Ended Discovery of Multiple Hypotheses with Agentic Data Exploration
arXiv:2610.17874v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Discovering what drives an outcome from data is central to science and often requires deciding what is worth investigating before a specific hypothesis is known. Yet most existing hypothesis generation settings substantially narrow this search by providing a research question, target relationship, or curated context. We introduce open-ended multiple hypothesis discovery, where a system receives only a large tabular dataset and an outcome and must discover multiple data-supported hypotheses without knowing in advance the relevant variables, functional forms, conditions, or number of underlying mechanisms. To study this problem, we introduce a benchmark built from structural causal models grounded in real-world data schemas, containing 351 planted hypotheses across 15 tasks and five domains, with 53--65 variables and 1M--10M rows per task. The causal model is hidden from the discovery method and retained only by the evaluator, allowing proposed hypotheses to be tested through interventions and separating observational discovery from causal validation. We further propose HypAgent, which treats the dataset as an interactive environment and performs iterative search by proposing candidate directions, triaging and refining promising hypotheses, and removing explained signal so that each accepted discovery redirects subsequent search. HypAgent achieves 0.47 precision, 0.51 recall, and 0.49 F1, compared with 0.35 F1 for the strongest baseline. Our analysis shows that many failures occur after a relevant variable has already been surfaced, suggesting that correctly characterizing a mechanism's functional form and conditions, rather than merely identifying relevant variables, remains a key challenge in open-ended discovery.
Abstract:Discovering what drives an outcome from data is central to science and often requires deciding what is worth investigating before a specific hypothesis is known. Yet most existing hypothesis generation settings substantially narrow this search by providing a research question, target relationship, or curated context. We introduce open-ended multiple hypothesis discovery, where a system receives only a large tabular dataset and an outcome and must discover multiple data-supported hypotheses without knowing in advance the relevant variables, functional forms, conditions, or number of underlying mechanisms. To study this problem, we introduce a benchmark built from structural causal models grounded in real-world data schemas, containing 351 planted hypotheses across 15 tasks and five domains, with 53--65 variables and 1M--10M rows per task. The causal model is hidden from the discovery method and retained only by the evaluator, allowing proposed hypotheses to be tested through interventions and separating observational discovery from causal validation. We further propose HypAgent, which treats the dataset as an interactive environment and performs iterative search by proposing candidate directions, triaging and refining promising hypotheses, and removing explained signal so that each accepted discovery redirects subsequent search. HypAgent achieves 0.47 precision, 0.51 recall, and 0.49 F1, compared with 0.35 F1 for the strongest baseline. Our analysis shows that many failures occur after a relevant variable has already been surfaced, suggesting that correctly characterizing a mechanism's functional form and conditions, rather than merely identifying relevant variables, remains a key challenge in open-ended discovery.
Machine Learning (cs.LG)
arXiv:2610.17874 [cs.LG]
(or arXiv:2610.17874v1 [cs.LG] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2610.17874 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.
Text integral sub licența deschisă a publicației · 336 cuvinte
Subiecte conexe
The J-Space Debate, Agent Swarms, and Pacing Frontier AI - Digital Minds Newsletter #4
LessWrong · 18 sept. 2026

Game Design Creativity evals
LessWrong · 12 oct. 2026

Informe de riesgos de la IA de frontera (febrero–marzo de 2026)
METR · 19 mai 2026

Frontier AI Risk Report (February–March 2026)
METR · 19 mai 2026