#01Jul 16, 2026
cs.AI
The Industrialization of Research ; On AI-Driven Science and Its Consequences
Emmanuel Jeannot
Artificial intelligence is transforming scientific research -- not merely as a more powerful instrument, but as an autonomous participant in the research cycle itself. This transition constitutes, in the most precise sense of the term, the industrialization of research: a shift from a craft model, in which knowledge, method, and judgment are embedded in the researcher, to a pipeline model, in which these steps are decomposed, automated, and supervised. The US Department of Energy's Genesis Mission is the most ambitious current instantiation of this shift, but the fundamental questions it raises extend far beyond any single program. This essay examines seven such questions: the erosion of the intergenerational transmission of scientific competence; the growing opacity of AI-generated theories; the collapse of peer evaluation under a flood of machine-generated output; the unproven capacity of AI for paradigm-shifting discovery; the capture of the scientific agenda by political and industrial actors; the compounding of systematic errors in closed-loop pipelines; and the structural bifurcation of the global research community into incommensurable tiers. These concerns do not constitute an argument against AI-driven science -- whose demonstrated potential is real and significant. They constitute the conditions under which that potential can be responsibly pursued.
#02Jul 16, 2026
cs.AI
Self-Evolving Human-Centered Framework for Explainable Depression Symptom Annotation
Hoang-Loc Cao, Van Pham, Truong Thanh Hung Nguyen and 4 more
Annotation quality is a major bottleneck in building reliable and explainable artificial intelligence (XAI) systems for mental health research. In depression-related datasets, labels are often assigned without structured evidence, symptom-level justification, or traceable alignment with the criteria of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition, Text Revision (DSM-5-TR), limiting both transparency and downstream model interpretability. We propose a self-evolving, expert-in-the-loop annotation framework for Major Depressive Disorder (MDD) that combines large language model (LLM)-assisted labeling with expert verification. The framework is intended to support the construction of explainable, DSM-5-TR-aligned datasets rather than to perform clinical diagnosis. It operates in three stages: candidate evidence selection from textual records, criterion-level DSM-5-TR analysis, and case-level synthesis that produces label-level diagnostic and severity annotations. A dual-memory architecture, composed of Example Memory and Reflection Memory, is designed to internalize expert feedback and iteratively improve future annotations without retraining. We describe this mechanism and leave its evaluation across multiple feedback cycles to future work. In addition to final labels, the framework exports clinical evidence, reasoning traces, and edit histories, enabling comprehensive auditability. In a pilot study using expert-reviewed samples, the proposed approach improves annotation consistency and explainability while reducing manual revision effort.
#03Jul 16, 2026
cs.AI
AutoSynthesis: An agentic system for automated meta-analysis
Moein Taherinezhad, Sebastian Maier, Gerardo Vitagliano and 2 more
Evidence synthesis is crucial for turning primary research into reliable knowledge for science, medicine, education, and policy. Yet, quantitative evidence synthesis remains largely manual and difficult to scale. Here, we introduce AutoSynthesis, an end-to-end multi-agent system for automated meta-analysis. Given a research question in natural language, AutoSynthesis formulates a search strategy, retrieves scientific literature, screens candidate studies, assesses full-text eligibility, extracts quantitative statistics, computes standardized effect sizes, and finally performs random-effects meta-analysis. AutoSynthesis further supports heterogeneity analysis to examine how effect sizes vary across moderators, as well as risk-of-bias assessment. As output, AutoSynthesis produces a transparent report aligned with PRISMA guidelines. In our application, AutoSynthesis screened over 28 studies and extracted more than 20 quantitative claims. The pooled effect estimates produced by AutoSynthesis are similar to Hedges' $g$ of expert-conducted meta-analyses, indicating close agreement with manual evidence synthesis. Together, these results show that AutoSynthesis can make quantitative evidence synthesis more scalable, thereby supporting evidence-based decision-making across disciplines.
#04Jul 16, 2026
cs.AI
teLLMe Why (Ain't Nothing but a Jam): Exploratory Causal Analysis of Urban Driving Data
Qiwei Li, Jorge Ortiz
Traffic agencies now have access to large volumes of video-derived data for studying safety and congestion. Most of these data are observational and collected without interventions, which makes causal questions such as "How would rain change traffic density?" difficult to answer. We present teLLMe, a system for exploratory causal analysis of urban driving datasets. The system starts from a structured event table built from dashcam annotations and combines causal structure learning with the PC algorithm, bootstrap-based stability checks, and query-specific effect estimation using linear regression and DoWhy. Natural-language questions are mapped to structured causal queries through a schema-aware LLM, enabling users to specify treatments, outcomes, and subpopulations. teLLMe returns a "Causal Card" that summarizes effect estimates, adjustment sets, DAG support, and assumptions, followed by a short natural-language explanation. Case studies on BDD-derived traffic events show that the system can surface plausible relationships involving weather, peak hours, and traffic density, while making uncertainty and modeling choices explicit. The system is designed as a tool for hypothesis generation and expert reasoning rather than a source of definitive causal claims.
#05Jul 16, 2026
cs.CL
Partition, Prompt, Aggregate: Statistical Self-Consistency in Language Models
Patrik Wolf, Thomas Kleine Buening, Andreas Krause and 1 more
In-context learning is commonly interpreted as a form of conditional inference, in which the prompt specifies a context and the model's output is treated as an estimate of the corresponding conditional distribution. If this interpretation holds, then LLM estimates should satisfy basic probabilistic identities. In particular, the law of total probability asserts that prior-weighted conditional distributions aggregate into population-level marginals over any valid partition of the population. In this work, we investigate to what extent LLM estimates adhere to this self-consistency principle. We use binary trees as an evaluation scaffold to recursively partition a population into increasingly fine-grained subpopulations. We then prompt LLMs with verbalized subpopulation descriptions in context, aggregate the resulting estimates back into population-level estimates, and compare them across partitions of varying granularity. Applying this protocol across problem domains and state-of-the-art frontier models, we show widespread violations of basic consistency properties. An in-depth study of persona prompting reveals a pattern we call the macro fallacy: estimates reconstructed from more fine-grained subpopulation responses are often better aligned with human reference data than direct population-level estimates. This effect persists across variations in tree structure and estimation task, and can be partially recovered through implicit prompting. Together, these findings suggest that models possess relevant subpopulation knowledge but do not reliably propagate it into aggregate estimates. This gap establishes statistical self-consistency as an unsaturated, reference-free criterion for evaluating LLMs.