Scores Alone Do Not Prove Discovery: The Discovery Certification Protocol for Auditing AI Research Agents
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
AI research agents combine public information and experimental feedback to produce measurable results. The Discovery Certification Protocol (DCP) turns an outcome claim into an executable audit under a registered model, information boundary, and budget. Gate 1 validates useful improvement. Gate 2 tests recovery by matched agents given the starting information and observed Web content, with run history and new measurements withheld. Core requires adequate registered controls, zero recoveries, and a finite-sample recovery bound. Optional Gate 3 compares truthful and neutral feedback from a shared checkpoint; Evidence adds a supported effect and a null-policy equivalence check. Controlled SQLite and virtual catalyst audits pass both decision kernels. On real-data response surfaces, Yacht and Ionosphere pass the Core kernel after zero recoveries in 96 attempts, with an upper bound of 0.0468. Each target combines ten observed utilities and six predictions into a 16-entry data product. Yacht scores 0.7677 on reconstruction of all 32 switch effects, with utility-prediction MAE 0.0315 on its six unmeasured configurations. Fresh truthful continuations recover the target level in 9/30 and 16/30 trials, respectively, separating achieved utility from process repeatability. A deterministic verifier reproduces these local decisions from frozen records.
Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 31 of its 42 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 7 Sep 2026.
Builds on
31 of 42 references.
References · 31
- 2022ReAct: Synergizing Reasoning and Acting in Language Modelscited by 8,695
- 2020Measuring Massive Multitask Language Understandingcited by 7,963
- 2023Reflexion: Language Agents with Verbal Reinforcement Learningcited by 4,276
- 2023Self-Refine: Iterative Refinement with Self-Feedbackcited by 3,442
- 2023SWE-bench: Can Language Models Resolve Real-World GitHub Issues?cited by 3,373
- 2023Tree of Thoughts: Deliberate Problem Solving with Large Language Modelscited by 3,211
- 2020Extracting Training Data from Large Language Modelscited by 2,189
- 2022Beyond the Imitation Game: Quantifying and extrapolating the capabilities of language modelscited by 1,998
- 2025AlphaEvolve: A coding agent for scientific and algorithmic discoverycited by 867
- 2024MLE-bench: Evaluating Machine Learning Agents on Machine Learning Engineeringcited by 469
- 2025The AI Scientist-v2: Workshop-Level Automated Scientific Discovery via Agentic Tree Searchcited by 422
- 2025Accelerating scientific discovery with Co-Scientistcited by 401
19 more
- 2020A Metric Learning Reality Checkcited by 321
- 2025PaperBench: Evaluating AI's Ability to Replicate AI Researchcited by 321
- 2024ScienceAgentBench: Toward Rigorous Assessment of Language Agents for Data-Driven Scientific Discoverycited by 235
- 2026Towards End-to-End Automation of AI Researchcited by 159
- 2025MLGym: A New Framework and Benchmark for Advancing AI Research Agentscited by 124
- 2017On the State of the Art of Evaluation in Neural Language Modelscited by 104
- 2024DISCOVERYWORLD: A Virtual Environment for Developing and Evaluating Automated Scientific Discovery Agentscited by 100
- 2021Proof-of-Learning: Definitions and Practicecited by 84
- 2025MLR-Bench: Evaluating AI Agents on Open-Ended Machine Learning Researchcited by 64
- 2026SkillLearnBench: Benchmarking Continual Learning Methods for Agent Skill Generation on Real-World Taskscited by 55
- 2023Data Contamination Quiz: A Tool to Detect and Estimate Contamination in Large Language Modelscited by 47
- 2026ScientistOne: Towards Human-Level Autonomous Research via Chain-of-Evidencecited by 19
- 2026FIRE-Bench: Evaluating AI Agents on the Rediscovery of Scientific Insightscited by 16
- 2026Auto Research with Specialist Agents Develops Effective and Non-Trivial Training Recipescited by 10
- 2026Revision or Re-Solving? Decomposing Second-Pass Gains in Multi-LLM Pipelinescited by 7
- 2026Closed-loop Auto Research for Molecular Property Prediction: Discovering and Certifying Generalizable Improvementscited by 6
- 2026Auto Research for Materials: Auditable AI-Scientist Workflows with Held-Out Transfercited by 5
- 2026The Implementation Lottery: Auditing Idea Reliability in Automated Researchcited by 5
- 2026Can LLM Agents Discover? Evaluating Creativity on ML Engineering Taskscited by 1
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.
1 paper.
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2026Auditing Discovery Claims: A Two-Sided Criterion for Agentic Science, with the Negative Side Decidable
- 2026From Fluent to Verifiable: Claim-Level Auditability for Deep Research Agents
- 2026Toward Auditable AI Scientists: A Hypothesis Evolution Protocol for LLM Agents
- 2026Do Agent Benchmarks Measure Capability? Protocol Validity in the Age of Agentic AI
- 2026From Trajectories to Evidence: Auditable Experimental Records for Industrial Research Agents
- 2026Beyond Execution: Auditing Experimental Fidelity in LLM-Driven Scientific Research
- 2026CrossAudit: A Git-Native, Cross-Vendor Audit Loop for Agentic Science
- 2026What Output-Only Review Cannot Verify: Study Contracts for Research Agents