Cognitive Loop via In-Situ Optimization: Self-Adaptive Reasoning for Science
On the map: LLM reasoning → Knowledge- and tool-augmented reasoning
Abstract (arXiv)
The capacity for artificial intelligence (AI) to formulate, evolve, and test altered thought patterns under dynamic conditions indicates advanced cognition that is crucial for scientific discovery. The existing AI development landscape falls into two categories: 1) frameworks over non-reasoning models that natively incorporate opinions on how humans think, and 2) reasoning models that abstract precise control of the reasoning intuition away from end users. While powerful, for scientists to maximize utility of AI in scientific discovery, they not only require accuracy and transparency in reasoning, but also steerability. Hence, we introduce an alternative approach that enables deep and precise control over the reasoning process called: a cognitive loop via in-situ optimization (CLIO). CLIO enables large language models (LLMs) to self-formulate ways of approaching a problem, adapt behavior when self-confidence is low, and ultimately provide scientists with a final belief or answer. Through CLIO's open design, scientists can observe uncertainty levels, understand how final belief states are formulated using graph structures, and interject corrections. Without any further post-training, OpenAI's GPT-4.1 with CLIO yields an accuracy of 22.37% in text-based biology and medicine questions on Humanity's Last Exam (HLE). This yields a 13.82% net or 161.64% relative increase when compared to the base GPT-4.1 model and surpasses OpenAI's o3 performance in high and low reasoning effort modes. We further discovered that oscillations within internal uncertainty measures are key in determining the accuracy of CLIO's results, revealing how its open design and internal mechanisms can provide insight and control into scientific decision-making processes.
Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in Knowledge- and tool-augmented reasoning, one of 17 directions in LLM reasoning. Builds on 21 of its 35 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 4 Aug 2025.
Builds on
21 of 35 references.
References · 21
- 2022Chain-of-Thought Prompting Elicits Reasoning in Large Language Modelscited by 12,459
- 2022ReAct: Synergizing Reasoning and Acting in Language Modelscited by 8,695
- 2025DeepSeek-R1: Incentivizing Reasoning Capability in LLMs via Reinforcement Learningcited by 6,330
- 2022PaLM: Scaling Language Modeling with Pathwayscited by 5,326
- 2023Lost in the Middle: How Language Models Use Long Contextscited by 3,455
- 2024From Local to Global: A Graph RAG Approach to Query-Focused Summarizationcited by 1,453
- 2024RULER: What's the Real Context Size of Your Long-Context Language Models?cited by 1,346
- 2024The AI Scientist: Towards Fully Automated Open-Ended Scientific Discoverycited by 1,071
- 2025AlphaEvolve: A coding agent for scientific and algorithmic discoverycited by 867
- 2025Accelerating scientific discovery with Co-Scientistcited by 401
- 2025The Illusion of Thinking: Understanding the Strengths and Limitations of Reasoning Models via the Lens of Problem Complexitycited by 302
- 2025Towards Large Reasoning Models: A Survey of Reinforced Reasoning with Large Language Modelscited by 293
9 more
- 2025Reinforcement Learning with Verifiable Rewards Implicitly Incentivizes Correct Reasoning in Base LLMscited by 289
- 2025Chain of Thought Monitorability: A New and Fragile Opportunity for AI Safetycited by 249
- 2025Learning to Reason without External Rewardscited by 210
- 2023Generative artificial intelligence enhances creativity but reduces the diversity of novel contentcited by 167
- 2025Crossing the Reward Bridge: Expanding RL with Verifiable Rewards Across Diverse Domainscited by 156
- 2025Agentic AI for Scientific Discovery: A Survey of Progress, Challenges, and Future Directionscited by 77
- 2025Robin: A multi-agent system for automating scientific discoverycited by 62
- 2025TxGemma: Efficient and Agentic LLMs for Therapeuticscited by 41
- 2024The Future of Open Human Feedbackcited by 10
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.
1 paper.
- 2026Closed-Loop Molecular Design with Calibrated Deferencecited by 0
- 2026Closed-Loop Molecular Design with Calibrated Deference27 May 2026
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2025CoT-Evo: Evolutionary Distillation of Chain-of-Thought for Scientific Reasoning
- 2025AI-Researcher: Autonomous Scientific Innovation
- 2026OPT-BENCH: Evaluating the Iterative Self-Optimization of LLM Agents in Large-Scale Search Spaces
- 2026Unlocking LLM Creativity in Science through Analogical Reasoning
- 2026A3-Bench: Benchmarking Memory-Driven Scientific Reasoning via Anchor and Attractor Activation
- 2026COGTRL: Training LLMs for Scientific Discovery Assistance using Cognitive Traces via Reinforcement Learning
- 2026FALSIFYBENCH: Evaluating Inductive Reasoning in LLMs with Rule Discovery Games
- 2026Contemporary AI lacks the imagination to diverge or negate in science