ReplicatorBench evaluates LLM agents on replicating social and behavioral science claims across retrieval, computation, and interpretation stages, finding strength in experiment execution but weakness in resource retrieval.
Truong, Weixin Liang, Fan-Yun Sun, and Nick Haber
9 Pith papers cite this work. Polarity classification is still indexing.
9
Pith papers citing it
citation-role summary
background 2
citation-polarity summary
roles
background 2polarities
background 2representative citing papers
Phoenix-bench shows agentic AI systems lose 37-58% resolved rate when moving from SWE-bench Verified to hardware tasks because bugs spread across parallel modules via signal flow, with testbench feedback lifting performance by 42-45% while file-level oracles add only 1.4%.
LLMs predict outcomes of real scientific experiments at 14-26% accuracy, comparable to human experts, but lack calibration on prediction reliability while humans demonstrate strong calibration.
FactReview extracts claims from ML papers, positions them via literature retrieval, and verifies them through code execution, labeling each as Supported, Partially supported, or In conflict, as shown in a CompGCN case study.
Clarification-seeking in LLM agents amplifies prompt injection attack success from ~2% to over 30% across ten frontier models in a new 728-scenario benchmark.
MLReplicate benchmark evaluates six autonomous systems on 45 manuscripts from ICML 2025 papers, finding that automated reviews accept flawed outputs with fabricated claims while human review exposes methodological failures, and that the cheapest system outperforms the most expensive by a wide margin
CodeDistiller distills 250 materials-science GitHub repositories into vetted code libraries that improve the accuracy and scientific soundness of experiments generated by ASD agents.
AblateCell reproduces baselines in three single-cell perturbation repositories with 88.9% success and recovers ground-truth critical components with 93.3% accuracy via closed-loop ablation.
The paper delivers a stage-by-stage roadmap for AI in research, showing reliable assistance in retrieval and tool tasks but fragility in novelty and judgment, advocating human-governed collaboration.
citing papers explorer
-
ReplicatorBench: Benchmarking LLM Agents for Replicability in Social and Behavioral Sciences
ReplicatorBench evaluates LLM agents on replicating social and behavioral science claims across retrieval, computation, and interpretation stages, finding strength in experiment execution but weakness in resource retrieval.
-
Is Agentic AI Ready for Real-World Hardware Engineering? A Deep Dive with Phoenix-bench
Phoenix-bench shows agentic AI systems lose 37-58% resolved rate when moving from SWE-bench Verified to hardware tasks because bugs spread across parallel modules via signal flow, with testbench feedback lifting performance by 42-45% while file-level oracles add only 1.4%.
-
SciPredict: Can LLMs Predict the Outcomes of Scientific Experiments in Natural Sciences?
LLMs predict outcomes of real scientific experiments at 14-26% accuracy, comparable to human experts, but lack calibration on prediction reliability while humans demonstrate strong calibration.
-
FactReview: Evidence-Grounded Reviews with Literature Positioning and Execution-Based Claim Verification
FactReview extracts claims from ML papers, positions them via literature retrieval, and verifies them through code execution, labeling each as Supported, Partially supported, or In conflict, as shown in a CompGCN case study.
-
ASPI: Seeking Ambiguity Clarification Amplifies Prompt Injection Vulnerability in LLM Agents
Clarification-seeking in LLM agents amplifies prompt injection attack success from ~2% to over 30% across ten frontier models in a new 728-scenario benchmark.
-
MLReplicate: Benchmarking Autonomous Research Systems for Machine Learning Reproducibility
MLReplicate benchmark evaluates six autonomous systems on 45 manuscripts from ICML 2025 papers, finding that automated reviews accept flawed outputs with fabricated claims while human review exposes methodological failures, and that the cheapest system outperforms the most expensive by a wide margin
-
CodeDistiller: Automatically Generating Code Libraries for Scientific Coding Agents
CodeDistiller distills 250 materials-science GitHub repositories into vetted code libraries that improve the accuracy and scientific soundness of experiments generated by ASD agents.
-
AblateCell: A Reproduce-then-Ablate Agent for Virtual Cell Repositories
AblateCell reproduces baselines in three single-cell perturbation repositories with 88.9% success and recovers ground-truth critical components with 93.3% accuracy via closed-loop ablation.
-
AI for Auto-Research: Roadmap & User Guide
The paper delivers a stage-by-stage roadmap for AI in research, showing reliable assistance in retrieval and tool tasks but fragility in novelty and judgment, advocating human-governed collaboration.