# IdeaBench: Benchmarking Large Language Models for Research Idea Generation

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2411.02429 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2411.02429/

## Key facts

- Cited by 23 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 17 of its 25 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 31 Oct 2024.

## Builds on (most cited first, 17 of 17)

- [Language Models are Few-Shot Learners](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2005.14165/) (2020)
- [Llama 2: Open Foundation and Fine-Tuned Chat Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2307.09288/) (2023)
- [BERTScore: Evaluating Text Generation with BERT](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1904.09675/) (2019)
- [Large Language Models are Zero-Shot Reasoners](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2205.11916/) (2022)
- [Gemini 1.5: Unlocking multimodal understanding across millions of tokens of context](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2403.05530/) (2024)
- [Sparks of Artificial General Intelligence: Early experiments with GPT-4](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.12712/) (2023)
- [G-Eval: NLG Evaluation using GPT-4 with Better Human Alignment](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.16634/) (2023)
- [Can Large Language Models Be an Alternative to Human Evaluations?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.01937/) (2023)
- [BARTScore: Evaluating Generated Text as Text Generation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2106.11520/) (2021)
- [MoverScore: Text Generation Evaluating with Contextualized Embeddings and Earth Mover Distance](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1909.02622/) (2019)
- [Benchmarking Foundation Models with Language-Model-as-an-Examiner](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2306.04181/) (2023)
- [The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2301.10140/) (2023)
- [Automatic Machine Translation Evaluation in Many Languages via Zero-Shot Paraphrasing](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2004.14564/) (2020)
- [Large Language Models for Automated Open-domain Scientific Hypotheses Discovery](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2309.02726/) (2023)
- [Phenomenal Yet Puzzling: Testing Inductive Reasoning Capabilities of Language Models with Hypothesis Refinement](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.08559/) (2023)
- [Foundational Autoraters: Taming Large Language Models for Better Automatic Evaluation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2407.10817/) (2024)
- [An LLM-based Knowledge Synthesis and Scientific Reasoning Framework for Biomedical Discovery](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.18626/) (2024)

## Built on by (most cited first, 23 of 23)

- [ResearchGym: Evaluating Language Model Agents on Real-World AI Research](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2602.15112/) (2026)
- [FIRE-Bench: Evaluating AI Agents on the Rediscovery of Scientific Insights](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2602.02905/) (2026)
- [AI for Auto-Research: Roadmap & User Guide](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2605.18661/) (2026)
- [Evolving Roles of LLMs in Scientific Innovation: Assistant, Collaborator, Scientist, and Evaluator](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2507.11810/) (2025)
- [Autonomous Research Agents: A Survey of AI Scientists and the Verification Gap](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2608.05179/) (2026)
- [Learning to Predict Future-Aligned Research Proposals with Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2603.27146/) (2026)
- [MLReplicate: Benchmarking Autonomous Research Systems for Machine Learning Reproducibility](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2605.16616/) (2026)
- [CREATE: Testing LLMs for Associative Creativity](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2603.09970/) (2026)
- [HypoSpace: A Diagnostic Benchmark for Set-Valued Hypothesis Generation under Underdetermination and Sublinear Coverage Bounds](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2510.15614/) (2025)
- [The Story is Not the Science: Execution-Grounded Evaluation of Mechanistic Interpretability Research](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2602.18458/) (2026)
- [Language of Thought Shapes Output Diversity in Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2601.11227/) (2026)
- [AD-Bench: A Real-World, Trajectory-Aware Advertising Analytics Benchmark for LLM Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2602.14257/) (2026)
- [ResearchStudio-Idea: An Evidence-Grounded Research-Ideation Skill Suite from ML Conference Outcomes](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2607.04439/) (2026)
- [Style Wins, Substance Loses: A Diagnosis of LLM-as-Judge in Idea Generation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2608.01666/) (2026)
- [What Proves You Wrong: Benchmarking Language Models on Falsifiable Research Ideation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2608.22948/) (2026)
- [Can Large Language Models Forecast What Researchers Study Next?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2609.00747/) (2026)
- [Evaluation Hallucination in Multi-Round Incomplete Information Lateral-Driven Reasoning Tasks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.23843/) (2025)
- [A case study of evaluating AI agents on a neuroscience data-to-discovery pipeline](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2606.07718/) (2026)
- [Ideation Arena: Evaluating LLM Generated Research Ideas with Battle-style Human Expert Assessment](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2608.29696/) (2026)
- [Towards a Science of Collective AI: LLM-based Multi-Agent Systems Need a Transition from Blind Trial-and-Error to Rigorous Science](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2602.05289/) (2026)
- [Continuous Knowledge Metabolism: Generating Scientific Hypotheses from Evolving Literature](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2604.12243/) (2026)
- [AgentIdeaBench: Benchmarking Scientific Ideation in the Agent Era](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2609.07611/) (2026)
- [Priced Guidance: Can Language Models Generate Future Research Ideas?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2610.04976/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Large Language Models (LLMs) have transformed how people interact with artificial intelligence (AI) systems, achieving state-of-the-art results in various tasks, including scientific discovery and hypothesis generation. However, the lack of a comprehensive and systematic evaluation framework for generating research ideas using LLMs poses a significant obstacle to understanding and assessing their generative capabilities in scientific discovery. To address this gap, we propose IdeaBench, a benchmark system that includes a comprehensive dataset and an evaluation framework for standardizing the assessment of research idea generation using LLMs. Our dataset comprises titles and abstracts from a diverse range of influential papers, along with their referenced works. To emulate the human process of generating research ideas, we profile LLMs as domain-specific researchers and ground them in the same context considered by human researchers. This maximizes the utilization of the LLMs' parametric knowledge to dynamically generate new research ideas. We also introduce an evaluation framework for assessing the quality of generated research ideas. Our evaluation framework is a two-stage process: first, using GPT-4o to rank ideas based on user-specified quality indicators such as novelty and feasibility, enabling scalable personalization; and second, calculating relative ranking based "Insight Score" to quantify the chosen quality indicator. The proposed benchmark system will be a valuable asset for the community to measure and compare different LLMs, ultimately advancing the automation of the scientific discovery process.