# SciLens: Multi-modal Scientific Claim Verification with Agentic Entailment and Grounding

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2606.20873 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2606.20873/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Placed in Web, search, and research agents, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use.
- Builds on 16 of its 20 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 18 Jun 2026.

## Placed in

- LLM agents and tool use / [Web, search, and research agents](https://mlsanity.com/agents/web-search-and-research-agents/)

## Builds on (most cited first, 16 of 16)

- [FEVER: a large-scale dataset for Fact Extraction and VERification](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1803.05355/) (2018)
- [SciFact-Open: Towards open-domain scientific claim verification](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2210.13777/) (2022)
- [From Automation to Autonomy: A Survey on Large Language Models in Scientific Discovery](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.13259/) (2025)
- [LLM4SR: A Survey on Large Language Models for Scientific Research](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2501.04306/) (2025)
- [ScienceBoard: Evaluating Multimodal Autonomous Agents in Realistic Scientific Workflows](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.19897/) (2025)
- [Cognitive Kernel-Pro: A Framework for Deep Research Agents and Agent Foundation Models Training](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2508.00414/) (2025)
- [NewtonBench: Benchmarking Generalizable Scientific Law Discovery in LLM Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2510.07172/) (2025)
- [Text-Tuple-Table: Towards Information Integration in Text-to-Table Generation via Global Tuple Extraction](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2404.14215/) (2024)
- [The Curse of CoT: On the Limitations of Chain-of-Thought in In-Context Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2504.05081/) (2025)
- [MMLongBench: Benchmarking Long-Context Vision-Language Models Effectively and Thoroughly](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.10610/) (2025)
- [LogiDynamics: Unraveling the Dynamics of Inductive, Abductive and Deductive Logical Inferences in LLM Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.11176/) (2025)
- [LLM-Hanabi: Evaluating Multi-Agent Gameplays with Theory-of-Mind and Rationale Inference in Imperfect Information Collaboration Game](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2510.04980/) (2025)
- [SciClaimEval: Cross-modal Claim Verification in Scientific Papers](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2602.07621/) (2026)
- [Enhancing Transformers for Generalizable First-Order Logical Entailment](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2501.00759/) (2025)
- [DixitWorld: Evaluating Multimodal Abductive Reasoning in Vision-Language Models with Multi-Agent Dixit Gameplay](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2510.10117/) (2025)
- [SciResearcher: Scaling Deep Research Agents for Frontier Scientific Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2605.01489/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Scientific discovery increasingly relies on automated systems that generate hypotheses, inspect multimodal evidence, and validate claims at scale. Yet scientific claim verification is not well served by asking a vision-language model for a direct binary judgment: claims often combine numerical results, comparisons, scope qualifiers, and explanatory context, while evidence is encoded in tables and figures with distinct grounding structures. We present SciLens, an evidence-conditioned atomic entailment framework for multimodal scientific claim verification. SciLens decomposes each claim into central empirical atoms and background atoms, grounds the central atoms to modality-specific evidence witnesses, and predicts the final label with an atom-level entailment rule. For tables, atoms are grounded to rows, columns, cells, arithmetic relations, and table scope; for figures, they are grounded through panels, axes, legends, visual encodings, categories, trends, ranks, and qualifier checks. This yields a unified validation procedure in which a claim is supported only if every central empirical atom is entailed by the current evidence. On the SciClaimEval development set, SciLens achieves 79.2% macro-F1 and 63.1% pair accuracy, showing that structured agentic validation improves both evidence sensitivity and interpretability.