arXiv (All)
open access
ACED-Bench: Evaluating How LLM Agents Acquire and Act on Causal Evidence
Large language models are increasingly used as scientific assistants, yet we still lack reliable ways to evaluate whether they can investigate a system rather than merely answer a prompt. A useful evaluation must let agents choose experiments, interpret finite evidence, and make causal decisions, wh
Conceptio Open Archive
Analyze & explore related research in Conceptio
Connect this record directly into your research workflow or AI agent. Explore citations across open repositories, query full text, and export structured proof bundles.
This document is indexed with metadata only: full text is not available in the archive for this record. Open the official source ↗
Related documents
- SciLitBench: Benchmark and Design Principles for LLM-Powered Systematic Literature Reviews#972566
- From Rubrics to Reliable Scores: Evidence-Grounded Text Evaluation with LLM Judges#987553
- HalluPeer: A Taxonomy-driven Benchmark for Detecting Hallucinations in Scientific Peer Reviews#926487
- Beyond the Text: Verifying That Agent-Written Papers Are Backed by Their Artifacts#1036795
- When AI Reviews Train AI Reviewers: Scientific-Judgment Collapse and Mitigation#1034916
Record · ID 1325277
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Bring this data into your agent: Connect via MCP or API · 20 free credits to start · no card required
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive