mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

SciIF: Benchmarking Scientific Instruction Following Towards Rigorous Scientific Intelligence

arXiv 2601.04770 ↗First posted 8 Jan 2026cs.AI cs.DBcited by 3

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

As large language models (LLMs) transition from general knowledge retrieval to complex scientific discovery, their evaluation standards must also incorporate the rigorous norms of scientific inquiry. Existing benchmarks exhibit a critical blind spot: general instruction-following metrics focus on superficial formatting, while domain-specific scientific benchmarks assess only final-answer correctness, often rewarding models that arrive at the right result with the wrong reasons. To address this gap, we introduce scientific instruction following: the capability to solve problems while strictly adhering to the constraints that establish scientific validity. Specifically, we introduce SciIF, a multi-discipline benchmark that evaluates this capability by pairing university-level problems with a fixed catalog of constraints across three pillars: scientific conditions (e.g., boundary checks and assumptions), semantic stability (e.g., unit and symbol conventions), and specific processes(e.g., required numerical methods). Uniquely, SciIF emphasizes auditability, requiring models to provide explicit evidence of constraint satisfaction rather than implicit compliance. By measuring both solution correctness and multi-constraint adherence, SciIF enables finegrained diagnosis of compositional reasoning failures, ensuring that LLMs can function as reliable agents within the strict logical frameworks of science.

Key facts. Cited by 3 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 11 of its 33 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 8 Jan 2026.

Builds on

11 of 33 references.

References · 11

  1. 2022Training language models to follow instructions with human feedbackcited by 15,712
  2. 2023Judging LLM-as-a-Judge with MT-Bench and Chatbot Arenacited by 8,393
  3. 2020Measuring Massive Multitask Language Understandingcited by 7,768
  4. 2022Training a Helpful and Harmless Assistant with Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedbackcited by 3,634
  5. 2022Constitutional AI: Harmlessness from AI Feedbackcited by 2,950
  6. 2022Self-Instruct: Aligning Language Models with Self-Generated Instructionscited by 2,674
  7. 2022Challenging BIG-Bench Tasks and Whether Chain-of-Thought Can Solve Themcited by 1,767
  8. 2020Beyond Accuracy: Behavioral Testing of NLP models with CheckListcited by 979
  9. 2023AlpacaFarm: A Simulation Framework for Methods that Learn from Human Feedbackcited by 738
  10. 2021Cross-Task Generalization via Natural Language Crowdsourcing Instructionscited by 696
  11. 2024CFBench: A Comprehensive Constraints-Following Benchmark for LLMscited by 65

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 3.

3 papers.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2023SciBench: Evaluating College-Level Scientific Problem-Solving Abilities of Large Language Models
  2. 2025Demystifying Scientific Problem-Solving in LLMs by Probing Knowledge and Reasoning
  3. 2025SCI-Verifier: Scientific Verifier with Thinking
  4. 2024SciInstruct: a Self-Reflective Instruction Annotated Dataset for Training Scientific Language Models
  5. 2025CURIE: Evaluating LLMs On Multitask Scientific Long Context Understanding and Reasoning
  6. 2026SciR: A Controllable Benchmark for Scientific Reasoning in LLMs
  7. 2026SciVQR: A Multidisciplinary Multimodal Benchmark for Advanced Scientific Reasoning Evaluation
  8. 2025SciReasoner: Laying the Scientific Reasoning Ground Across Disciplines