Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 cited by

ScholarSearch: Benchmarking Scholar Searching Ability of LLMs

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 2506.13784 v2 pith:5BVRKUIH submitted 2025-06-11 cs.IR cs.CL

ScholarSearch: Benchmarking Scholar Searching Ability of LLMs

classification cs.IR cs.CL
keywords academicscholarsearchllmsmodelssearchresearchabilityanswers
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
read the original abstract

Large Language Models (LLMs)' search capabilities have garnered significant attention. Existing benchmarks, such as OpenAI's BrowseComp, primarily focus on general search scenarios and fail to adequately address the specific demands of academic search. These demands include deeper literature tracing and organization, professional support for academic databases, the ability to navigate long-tail academic knowledge, and ensuring academic rigor. Here, we proposed ScholarSearch, the first dataset specifically designed to evaluate the complex information retrieval capabilities of Large Language Models (LLMs) in academic research. ScholarSearch possesses the following key characteristics: Academic Practicality, where question content closely mirrors real academic learning and research environments, avoiding deliberately misleading models; High Difficulty, with answers that are challenging for single models (e.g., Grok DeepSearch or Gemini Deep Research) to provide directly, often requiring at least three deep searches to derive; Concise Evaluation, where limiting conditions ensure answers are as unique as possible, accompanied by clear sources and brief solution explanations, greatly facilitating subsequent audit and verification, surpassing the current lack of analyzed search datasets both domestically and internationally; and Broad Coverage, as the dataset spans at least 15 different academic disciplines. Through ScholarSearch, we expect to more precisely measure and promote the performance improvement of LLMs in complex academic information retrieval tasks. The data is available at: https://huggingface.co/datasets/PKU-DS-LAB/ScholarSearch

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

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

  1. Toward Generalist Autonomous Research via Hypothesis-Tree Refinement

    cs.CL 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    Arbor combines a coordinator, executors, and a hypothesis tree to enable cumulative autonomous research, outperforming Codex and Claude Code by over 2.5x on six real tasks and reaching 86.36% Any Medal on MLE-Bench Lite.

  2. JoyAI-LLM Flash: Advancing Mid-Scale LLMs with Token Efficiency

    cs.CL 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 5.0

    JoyAI-LLM Flash delivers a 48B MoE LLM with 2.7B active parameters per token via FiberPO RL and dense multi-token prediction, released with checkpoints on Hugging Face.