# Searching for What Matters: Open-Ended Discovery of Multiple Hypotheses with Agentic Data Exploration

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.17874 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2610.17874/

## 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 17 of its 36 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 13 Oct 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, 17 of 17)

- [ReAct: Synergizing Reasoning and Acting in Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2210.03629/) (2022)
- [SWE-agent: Agent-Computer Interfaces Enable Automated Software Engineering](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2405.15793/) (2024)
- [Estimation and Inference of Heterogeneous Treatment Effects using Random Forests](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1510.04342/) (2015)
- [ScienceAgentBench: Toward Rigorous Assessment of Language Agents for Data-Driven Scientific Discovery](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.05080/) (2024)
- [Data Interpreter: An LLM Agent For Data Science](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.18679/) (2024)
- [DS-Agent: Automated Data Science by Empowering Large Language Models with Case-Based Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.17453/) (2024)
- [DSBench: How Far Are Data Science Agents from Becoming Data Science Experts?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2409.07703/) (2024)
- [DISCOVERYWORLD: A Virtual Environment for Developing and Evaluating Automated Scientific Discovery Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.06769/) (2024)
- [BLADE: Benchmarking Language Model Agents for Data-Driven Science](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2408.09667/) (2024)
- [MOOSE-Chem: Large Language Models for Rediscovering Unseen Chemistry Scientific Hypotheses](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.07076/) (2024)
- [Hypothesis Generation with Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2404.04326/) (2024)
- [ResearchBench: Benchmarking LLMs in Scientific Discovery via Inspiration-Based Task Decomposition](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2503.21248/) (2025)
- [HypoBench: Towards Systematic and Principled Benchmarking for Hypothesis Generation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2504.11524/) (2025)
- [Large Language Models as Biomedical Hypothesis Generators: A Comprehensive Evaluation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2407.08940/) (2024)
- [AutoDiscovery: Open-ended Scientific Discovery via Bayesian Surprise](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2507.00310/) (2025)
- [Literature Meets Data: A Synergistic Approach to Hypothesis Generation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.17309/) (2024)
- [HypoSpace: A Diagnostic Benchmark for Set-Valued Hypothesis Generation under Underdetermination and Sublinear Coverage Bounds](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2510.15614/) (2025)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Discovering what drives an outcome from data is central to science and often requires deciding what is worth investigating before a specific hypothesis is known. Yet most existing hypothesis generation settings substantially narrow this search by providing a research question, target relationship, or curated context. We introduce open-ended multiple hypothesis discovery, where a system receives only a large tabular dataset and an outcome and must discover multiple data-supported hypotheses without knowing in advance the relevant variables, functional forms, conditions, or number of underlying mechanisms. To study this problem, we introduce a benchmark built from structural causal models grounded in real-world data schemas, containing 351 planted hypotheses across 15 tasks and five domains, with 53--65 variables and 1M--10M rows per task. The causal model is hidden from the discovery method and retained only by the evaluator, allowing proposed hypotheses to be tested through interventions and separating observational discovery from causal validation. We further propose HypAgent, which treats the dataset as an interactive environment and performs iterative search by proposing candidate directions, triaging and refining promising hypotheses, and removing explained signal so that each accepted discovery redirects subsequent search. HypAgent achieves 0.47 precision, 0.51 recall, and 0.49 F1, compared with 0.35 F1 for the strongest baseline. Our analysis shows that many failures occur after a relevant variable has already been surfaced, suggesting that correctly characterizing a mechanism's functional form and conditions, rather than merely identifying relevant variables, remains a key challenge in open-ended discovery.