mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

CORE-Bench: Fostering the Credibility of Published Research Through a Computational Reproducibility Agent Benchmark

arXiv 2409.11363 ↗First posted 17 Sep 2024cs.CL cs.AI cs.MAcited by 115

On the map: LLM agents and tool use → Web, search, and research agents

Abstract (arXiv)

AI agents have the potential to aid users on a variety of consequential tasks, including conducting scientific research. To spur the development of useful agents, we need benchmarks that are challenging, but more crucially, directly correspond to real-world tasks of interest. This paper introduces such a benchmark, designed to measure the accuracy of AI agents in tackling a crucial yet surprisingly challenging aspect of scientific research: computational reproducibility. This task, fundamental to the scientific process, involves reproducing the results of a study using the provided code and data. We introduce CORE-Bench (Computational Reproducibility Agent Benchmark), a benchmark consisting of 270 tasks based on 90 scientific papers across three disciplines (computer science, social science, and medicine). Tasks in CORE-Bench consist of three difficulty levels and include both language-only and vision-language tasks. We provide an evaluation system to measure the accuracy of agents in a fast and parallelizable way, saving days of evaluation time for each run compared to a sequential implementation. We evaluated two baseline agents: the general-purpose AutoGPT and a task-specific agent called CORE-Agent. We tested both variants using two underlying language models: GPT-4o and GPT-4o-mini. The best agent achieved an accuracy of 21% on the hardest task, showing the vast scope for improvement in automating routine scientific tasks. Having agents that can reproduce existing work is a necessary step towards building agents that can conduct novel research and could verify and improve the performance of other research agents. We hope that CORE-Bench can improve the state of reproducibility and spur the development of future research agents.

Key facts. Cited by 115 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Placed in Web, search, and research agents, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use. Builds on 23 of its 90 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 17 Sep 2024.

Builds on

23 of 90 references.

Closest ancestors · 1

Same direction, newest first

  1. 2024DiscoveryBench: Towards Data-Driven Discovery with Large Language Models1 Jul

Other references · 22

  1. 2021Evaluating Large Language Models Trained on Codecited by 8,053
  2. 2023SWE-bench: Can Language Models Resolve Real-World GitHub Issues?cited by 3,193
  3. 2024SWE-agent: Agent-Computer Interfaces Enable Automated Software Engineeringcited by 1,628
  4. 2022Competition-Level Code Generation with AlphaCodecited by 1,427
  5. 2024τ-bench: A Benchmark for Tool-Agent-User Interaction in Real-World Domainscited by 1,280
  6. 2024The AI Scientist: Towards Fully Automated Open-Ended Scientific Discoverycited by 1,002
  7. 2024Large Language Monkeys: Scaling Inference Compute with Repeated Samplingcited by 946
  8. 2021AI and the Everything in the Whole Wide World Benchmarkcited by 340
  9. 2020Improving Reproducibility in Machine Learning Research (A Report from the NeurIPS 2019 Reproducibility Program)cited by 318
  10. 2024AI Agents That Mattercited by 199
  11. 2024Lessons from the Trenches on Reproducible Evaluation of Language Modelscited by 172
  12. 2024SciCode: A Research Coding Benchmark Curated by Scientistscited by 172
10 more
  1. 2022MultiPL-E: A Scalable and Extensible Approach to Benchmarking Neural Code Generationcited by 132
  2. 2023ChartBench: A Benchmark for Complex Visual Reasoning in Chartscited by 116
  3. 2019A Step Toward Quantifying Independently Reproducible Machine Learning Researchcited by 77
  4. 2024CiteME: Can Language Models Accurately Cite Scientific Claims?cited by 45
  5. 2024The Larger the Better? Improved LLM Code-Generation via Budget Reallocationcited by 41
  6. 2021A Systematic Review of Reproducibility Research in Natural Language Processingcited by 34
  7. 2024Security of AI Agentscited by 24
  8. 2024PyBench: Evaluating LLM Agent on various real-world coding taskscited by 24
  9. 2021A large-scale study on research code quality and executioncited by 22
  10. 2023Computational reproducibility of Jupyter notebooks from biomedical publicationscited by 6

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2025: 27; 2026: 88.

115 papers.

Sort:

By area:

  1. 2025PaperBench: Evaluating AI's Ability to Replicate AI Researchcited by 286
  2. 2025Survey on Evaluation of LLM-based Agentscited by 190
  3. 2025Evaluation and Benchmarking of LLM Agents: A Surveycited by 145
  4. 2025Holistic Agent Leaderboard: The Missing Infrastructure for AI Agent Evaluationcited by 83
  5. 2025BixBench: a Comprehensive Benchmark for LLM-based Agents in Computational Biologycited by 75
  6. 2025SHADE-Arena: Evaluating Sabotage and Monitoring in LLM Agentscited by 58
  7. 2025SciReplicate-Bench: Benchmarking LLMs in Agent-driven Algorithmic Reproduction from Research Paperscited by 42
  8. 2025EnvBench: A Benchmark for Automated Environment Setupcited by 36
  9. 2025ResearchCodeBench: Benchmarking LLMs on Implementing Novel Machine Learning Research Codecited by 34
  10. 2026AIRS-Bench: a Suite of Tasks for Frontier AI Research Science Agentscited by 32
  11. 2025AutoReproduce: Automatic AI Experiment Reproduction with Paper Lineagecited by 29
  12. 2025When AI Co-Scientists Fail: SPOT-a Benchmark for Automated Verification of Scientific Researchcited by 25
38 more
  1. 2025FEABench: Evaluating Language Models on Multiphysics Reasoning Abilitycited by 21
  2. 2025REPRO-Bench: Can Agentic AI Systems Assess the Reproducibility of Social Science Research?cited by 21
  3. 2025AI Scientists Fail Without Strong Implementation Capabilitycited by 20
  4. 2026SWE-Marathon: Can Agents Autonomously Complete Ultra-Long-Horizon Software Work?cited by 19
  5. 2025RExBench: Can coding agents autonomously implement AI research extensions?cited by 17
  6. 2025How Far Are AI Scientists from Changing the World?cited by 15
  7. 2025PaperArena: An Evaluation Benchmark for Tool-Augmented Agentic Reasoning on Scientific Literaturecited by 15
  8. 2026Uncertainty Quantification in LLM Agents: Foundations, Emerging Challenges, and Opportunitiescited by 15
  9. 2025The AI Agent Indexcited by 14
  10. 2025AutoAdvExBench: Benchmarking autonomous exploitation of adversarial example defensescited by 14
  11. 2026FIRE-Bench: Evaluating AI Agents on the Rediscovery of Scientific Insightscited by 13
  12. 2025The Automated LLM Speedrunning Benchmark: Reproducing NanoGPT Improvementscited by 12
  13. 2025ReplicationBench: Can AI Agents Replicate Astrophysics Research Papers?cited by 10
  14. 2025Jr. AI Scientist and Its Risk Report: Autonomous Scientific Exploration from a Baseline Papercited by 10
  15. 2026How Well Does Agent Development Reflect Real-World Work?cited by 10
  16. 2026HeurekaBench: A Benchmarking Framework for AI Co-scientistcited by 9
  17. 2026SciCoQA: Quality Assurance for Scientific Paper--Code Alignmentcited by 9
  18. 2026ReplicatorBench: Benchmarking LLM Agents for Replicability in Social and Behavioral Sciencescited by 9
  19. 2026Efficient Benchmarking of AI Agentscited by 9
  20. 2026Can Coding Agents Reproduce Findings in Computational Materials Science?cited by 9
  21. 2026AutoResearch AI: Towards AI-Powered Research Automation for Scientific Discoverycited by 9
  22. 2026NatureBench: Can Coding Agents Match the Published SOTA of Nature-Family Papers?cited by 9
  23. 2025From Hypothesis to Publication: A Comprehensive Survey of AI-Driven Research Support Systemscited by 8
  24. 2025NetArena: Dynamic Benchmarks for AI Agents in Network Automationcited by 8
  25. 2026How Far Are We From True Auto-Research?cited by 8
  26. 2026Can AI agents conduct open-ended AI research? Early evidence from two case studiescited by 7
  27. 2026Collider-Bench: Benchmarking AI Agents with Particle Physics Analysis Reproductioncited by 6
  28. 2026MLReplicate: Benchmarking Autonomous Research Systems for Machine Learning Reproducibilitycited by 6
  29. 2026Autonomous Research Agents: A Survey of AI Scientists and the Verification Gapcited by 6
  30. 2025CFDLLMBench: A Benchmark Suite for Evaluating Large Language Models in Computational Fluid Dynamicscited by 5
  31. 2026Read the Paper, Write the Code: Agentic Reproduction of Social-Science Resultscited by 5
  32. 2026Beyond Individual Intelligence: Surveying Collaboration, Failure Attribution, and Self-Evolution in LLM-based Multi-Agent Systemscited by 5
  33. 2026ABC-Bench: An Agentic Bio-Capabilities Benchmark for Biosecuritycited by 5
  34. 2026CalibForge: Adversarial Solver Calibration for Scaling Learnable Terminal Taskscited by 5
  35. 2026Automating Computational Reproducibility in Social Science: Comparing Prompt-Based and Agent-Based Approachescited by 4
  36. 2026AI Coding Agents Can Reproduce Social Science Findingscited by 4
  37. 2026Training AI Scientists to Replicate Researchcited by 4
  38. 2026How Do Agents Fail on AutoResearch: End-to-End Diagnostic Evaluation on 100 Real-World Frontier Research Taskscited by 4

50 most cited of 115 All 115 (JSON)

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2025AstaBench: Rigorous Benchmarking of AI Agents with a Scientific Research Suite
  2. 2026ResearchClawBench: A Benchmark for End-to-End Autonomous Scientific Research
  3. 2026Benchmarking AI Agents for Addressing Scientific Challenges Across Scales
  4. 2026LABBench2: An Improved Benchmark for AI Systems Performing Biology Research
  5. 2025MLR-Bench: Evaluating AI Agents on Open-Ended Machine Learning Research
  6. 2026AutoResearchBench: Benchmarking AI Agents on Complex Scientific Literature Discovery
  7. 2026BixBench3: Benchmarking AI agents on research-study-scale computational biology tasks
  8. 2026AgentIdeaBench: Benchmarking Scientific Ideation in the Agent Era