It's not the Language Model, it's the Tool: Deterministic Mediation for Scientific Workflows
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Language models can produce convincing scientific analyses, but repeated generations on the same data do not guarantee the same result. A researcher may regenerate an identical query and receive a different fit, a different peak position or a different analysis procedure, without an obvious way to decide which output to trust. We propose typed mediation, a pattern in which the model orchestrates deterministic tools rather than generating analytical code. Each tool encodes one researcher's exact procedure for one instrument, ported through structured interviews. The model selects which tool to call and with what parameters. The tool produces the result. Regeneration does not change it. We evaluate this claim by running the same photoluminescence analysis on four platforms, including three commercial foundation models, four times each with the same prompt. The typed tool produces identical results across all runs. The commercial platforms either vary in numerical output and analytical methodology across runs, or fail to produce valid results on the task. We deploy this pattern on two instruments serving users over approximately six months, with very positive user feedback. Both cases are very challenging: they involve proprietary binary formats and per-seat licensed software, which force the tool to remain on local infrastructure alongside the data and the instrument it operates. We argue that deployment topology is not just a preference, but a structural requirement of scientific tool mediation. The result is a practical pattern for deploying language models in scientific workflows where reproducibility is mandatory, reducing analysis time from weeks to minutes while guaranteeing identical outputs across runs.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 11 of its 35 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 13 May 2026.
Builds on
11 of 35 references.
References · 11
- 2024Leak, Cheat, Repeat: Data Contamination and Evaluation Malpractices in Closed-Source LLMscited by 224
- 2026Towards Verifiably Safe Tool Use for LLM Agentscited by 34
- 2026Model Context Protocol (MCP) Tool Descriptions Are Smelly! Towards Improving AI Agent Efficiency with Augmented MCP Tool Descriptionscited by 15
- 2025Experiences with Model Context Protocol Servers for Science and High Performance Computingcited by 6
- 2025Agentic Artificial Intelligence for Multistage Physics Experiments at a Large-Scale User Facility Particle Acceleratorcited by 6
- 2026Toward Full Autonomous Laboratory Instrumentation Control with Large Language Modelscited by 5
- 2026Scaling Reproducibility: An AI-Assisted Workflow for Large-Scale Replication and Reanalysiscited by 4
- 2025The Evolving Role of Programming and LLMs in the Development of Self-Driving Laboratoriescited by 2
- 2026From Docs to Descriptions: Smell-Aware Evaluation of MCP Server Descriptionscited by 2
- 2026Owl-AuraID 1.0: An Intelligent System for Autonomous Scientific Instrumentation and Scientific Data Analysiscited by 2
- 2026Talk Freely, Execute Strictly: Schema-Gated Agentic AI for Flexible and Reproducible Scientific Workflowscited by 1
Built on by
Not cited yet.