mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Performance of AI agents based on reasoning language models on ALD process optimization tasks

arXiv 2601.09980 ↗First posted 15 Jan 2026cond-mat.mtrl-sci cs.AI cs.LGcited by 3

On the map: LLM reasoning → Clinical and biomedical applications

also in 1 more
Abstract (arXiv)

In this work we explore the performance and behavior of reasoning large language models to autonomously optimize atomic layer deposition (ALD) processes. In the ALD process optimization task, an agent built on top of a reasoning LLM has to find optimal dose times for an ALD precursor and a coreactant without any prior knowledge on the process, including whether it is actually self-limited. The agent is meant to interact iteratively with an ALD reactor in a fully unsupervised way. We evaluate this agent using a simple model of an ALD tool that incorporates ALD processes with different self-limited surface reaction pathways as well as a non self-limited component. Our results show that agents based on reasoning models like OpenAI's o3 and GPT5 consistently succeeded at completing this optimization task. However, we observed significant run-to-run variability due to the non deterministic nature of the model's response. In order to understand the logic followed by the reasoning model, the agent uses a two step process in which the model first generates an open response detailing the reasoning process. This response is then transformed into a structured output. An analysis of these reasoning traces showed that the logic of the model was sound and that its reasoning was based on the notions of self-limited process and saturation expected in the case of ALD. However, the agent can sometimes be misled by its own prior choices when exploring the optimization space.

Key facts. Cited by 3 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Placed in Clinical and biomedical applications, one of 17 directions in LLM reasoning. Builds on 6 of its 22 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 15 Jan 2026.

Builds on

6 of 22 references.

References · 6

  1. 2022Chain-of-Thought Prompting Elicits Reasoning in Large Language Modelscited by 12,302
  2. 2025DeepSeek-R1: Incentivizing Reasoning Capability in LLMs via Reinforcement Learningcited by 6,146
  3. 2023ChemCrow: Augmenting large-language models with chemistry toolscited by 609
  4. 2025MathArena: Evaluating LLMs on Uncontaminated Math Competitionscited by 275
  5. 2025RealMath: A Continuous Benchmark for Evaluating Language Models on Research-Level Mathematicscited by 30
  6. 2024Benchmarking large language models for materials synthesis: the case of atomic layer depositioncited by 8

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. 2025LLM Agents for Knowledge Discovery in Atomic Layer Processing
  2. 2025MiST: Understanding the Role of Mid-Stage Scientific Training in Developing Chemical Reasoning Models
  3. 2025AutoChemSchematic AI: Agentic Physics-Aware Automation for Chemical Manufacturing Scale-Up
  4. 2024Autonomous Microscopy Experiments through Large Language Model Agents
  5. 2024Retrieval-Augmented Instruction Tuning for Automated Process Engineering Calculations : A Tool-Chaining Problem-Solving Framework with Attributable Reflection
  6. 2025ChemAgent: Self-updating Library in Large Language Models Improves Chemical Reasoning
  7. 2025LLM-guided Chemical Process Optimization with a Multi-Agent Approach
  8. 2025From What to Why: A Multi-Agent System for Evidence-based Chemical Reaction Condition Reasoning