Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Large language models surpass human experts in predicting neuroscience results

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

arxiv 2403.03230 v4 pith:JQAOP3TL submitted 2024-03-04 q-bio.NC cs.AI

classification q-bio.NCcs.AI
keywords llmsexpertshumanneurosciencepredictingresultsbetterdiscoveries
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Scientific discoveries often hinge on synthesizing decades of research, a task that potentially outstrips human information processing capacities. Large language models (LLMs) offer a solution. LLMs trained on the vast scientific literature could potentially integrate noisy yet interrelated findings to forecast novel results better than human experts. To evaluate this possibility, we created BrainBench, a forward-looking benchmark for predicting neuroscience results. We find that LLMs surpass experts in predicting experimental outcomes. BrainGPT, an LLM we tuned on the neuroscience literature, performed better yet. Like human experts, when LLMs were confident in their predictions, they were more likely to be correct, which presages a future where humans and LLMs team together to make discoveries. Our approach is not neuroscience-specific and is transferable to other knowledge-intensive endeavors.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Beyond Human-Like Processing: Large Language Models Perform Equivalently on Forward and Backward Scientific Text

    cs.CL 2024-11 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    GPT-2 models trained on character-reversed neuroscience text perform as well on a neuroscience abstract-selection benchmark as models trained on normal text, despite higher perplexity.

Pith tools