REVIEW 14 cited by
Curie: Toward Rigorous and Automated Scientific Experimentation with AI Agents
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
Curie: Toward Rigorous and Automated Scientific Experimentation with AI Agents
read the original abstract
Scientific experimentation, a cornerstone of human progress, demands rigor in reliability, methodical control, and interpretability to yield meaningful results. Despite the growing capabilities of large language models (LLMs) in automating different aspects of the scientific process, automating rigorous experimentation remains a significant challenge. To address this gap, we propose Curie, an AI agent framework designed to embed rigor into the experimentation process through three key components: an intra-agent rigor module to enhance reliability, an inter-agent rigor module to maintain methodical control, and an experiment knowledge module to enhance interpretability. To evaluate Curie, we design a novel experimental benchmark composed of 46 questions across four computer science domains, derived from influential research papers, and widely adopted open-source projects. Compared to the strongest baseline tested, we achieve a 3.4$\times$ improvement in correctly answering experimental questions. Curie is open-sourced at https://github.com/Just-Curieous/Curie.
Forward citations
Cited by 14 Pith papers
-
Agentic AutoResearch forSpace Autonomy: An Auditable, LLM-Driven Research Agent for Aerospace Control Problems
An LLM-driven agent with built-in seed-noise audits develops control policies for two aerospace problems that outperform undirected search and pass verification checks.
-
Hypothesis-Driven Deep Research with Large Language Models: A Structured Methodology for Automated Knowledge Discovery
HDRI is a six-principle eight-stage framework for hypothesis-organized LLM research featuring gap-driven iteration, traceable fact reasoning, and subject locking, realized in INFOMINER with reported gains in fact dens...
-
Simulate, Reason, Decide: Scientific Reasoning with LLMs for Simulation-Driven Decision Making
MechSim is a mechanism-grounded framework that represents simulators via structured schemas and uses constrained LLM agents to generate evidence-based explanations linking outcomes to underlying mechanisms.
-
ScientistOne: Towards Human-Level Autonomous Research via Chain-of-Evidence
ScientistOne introduces Chain-of-Evidence and an audit system that achieves zero hallucinated references, perfect score verification, and top method-code alignment while matching or beating human experts on five front...
-
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 fai...
-
Can AI Evaluate AI Scientists? A Benchmarking Study of Autonomous Research Generation Systems Using Automated Multi-Model Review
In a benchmark of four AI Scientist systems on 15 FARS proposals, LLM reviewers rated FARS's own papers about twice as high as Sakana v1/v2, CycleResearcher, and Data-to-Paper outputs, but the evaluation lacks human v...
-
Paper2Rebuttal: A Multi-Agent Framework for Transparent Author Response Assistance
A multi-agent 'verify-then-write' system for writing peer-review rebuttals beats direct LLM prompting on a new benchmark, but the gains are measured by an LLM judge, not by the original reviewers.
-
RExBench: Can coding agents autonomously implement AI research extensions?
RExBench is a new benchmark showing that LLM coding agents fail to autonomously implement most realistic research extensions to prior AI papers.
-
Experiment-as-Code Labs: A Declarative Stack for AI-Driven Scientific Discovery
Experiment-as-Code Labs encodes experiments as declarative configurations that AI agents generate, systems software analyzes and orchestrates, and device APIs execute on physical lab hardware.
-
Experiment-as-Code Labs: A Declarative Stack for AI-Driven Scientific Discovery
The paper introduces Experiment-as-Code Labs as a declarative stack synthesizing AI agents, systems orchestration, and physical lab control for AI-driven discovery.
-
AutoResearch AI: Towards AI-Powered Research Automation for Scientific Discovery
A survey organizing AI-powered research automation into five workflow stages, defining AutoResearch and Vibe Research, and proposing five evaluation dimensions while noting domain-conditioned limits on autonomy.
-
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.
-
AI for Auto-Research: Roadmap & User Guide
AI can generate research artifacts faster than it can verify them, so across all eight lifecycle stages the credible deployment mode is human-governed collaboration rather than full autonomy.
-
Large Language Model Agent: A Survey on Methodology, Applications and Challenges
A survey that deconstructs LLM agent systems via a methodology-centered taxonomy linking design principles to emergent behaviors, applications, and challenges.
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.