AstaBench: Rigorous Benchmarking of AI Agents with a Scientific Research Suite
Jonathan Bragg, Mike D'Arcy, Nishant Balepur, Dan Bareket, Bhavana Dalvi Mishra, Sergey Feldman, Dany Haddad, Jena D. Hwang, Peter Jansen, Varsha Kishore, Bodhisattwa Prasad Majumder, Aakanksha Naik
Abstract
AI agents hold the potential to revolutionize scientific productivity by automating literature reviews, replicating experiments, analyzing data, and even proposing new directions of inquiry; indeed, there are now many such agents, ranging from general-purpose "deep research" systems to specialized science-specific agents, such as AI Scientist and AIGS. Rigorous evaluation of these agents is critical for progress. Yet existing benchmarks fall short on several fronts: they often (1) lack reproducible agent tools necessary for a controlled comparison of core agentic capabilities; (2) do not account for confounding variables such as model cost and tool access; (3) do not provide standardized interfaces for quick agent prototyping and evaluation; (4) fail to provide holistic, product-informed measures of real-world use cases such as science research; and (5) lack comprehensive baseline agents necessary to identify true advances. In response, we define principles and tooling for more rigorously benchmarking agents. Using these, we present AstaBench, a suite that provides a holistic measure of agentic ability to perform scientific research, comprising 2400+ problems spanning the entire scientific discovery process and multiple scientific domains, and including many problems inspired by actual user requests to deployed Asta agents. Our suite comes with the first scientific research environment with production-grade search tools that enable controlled, reproducible evaluation, better accounting for confounders. Alongside, we provide a comprehensive suite of nine science-optimized classes of Asta agents and numerous baselines. Our extensive evaluation of 57 agents across 22 agent classes reveals several interesting findings, most importantly that despite meaningful progress on certain individual aspects, AI remains far from solving the challenge of science research assistance.
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Your agent calls
Luneget_paper_fulltext
Free to start. No credit card required.
Terminal
Install the CLIlune papers fulltext 21c13836-1877-49a8-8ced-ca1b6d178e0fBuilds on16
- DS-1000: A Natural and Reliable Benchmark for Data Science Code GenerationYuhang Lai, Chengxi Li, Yiming Wang, Tianyi Zhang et al.ICML 2023 · 504 citations
- Executable Code Actions Elicit Better LLM AgentsXingyao Wang, Yangyi Chen, Lifan Yuan, Yizhe Zhang et al.ICML 2024 · 436 citations
- MLAgentBench: Evaluating Language Agents on Machine Learning ExperimentationQian Huang, Jian Vora, Percy Liang, Jure LeskovecICML 2024 · 209 citations
- AI-Researcher: Autonomous Scientific InnovationJiabin Tang, Lianghao Xia, Zhonghang Li, Chao HuangNeurIPS 2025 · 101 citations
- EXP-Bench: Can AI Conduct AI Research Experiments?Patrick Tser Jern Kon, Qiuyi Ding, Jiachen Liu, Xinyi Zhu et al.ICLR 2026 · 35 citations
Related papers
- ScienceAgentBench: Toward Rigorous Assessment of Language Agents for Data-Driven Scientific DiscoveryZiru Chen, Shijie Chen, Yuting Ning, Qianheng Zhang et al.ICLR 2025 · 6 citations
- From Reproduction to Replication: Evaluating Research Agents with Progressive Code MaskingGyeongwon James Kim, Alex Wilf, Louis-Philippe Morency, Daniel FriedICLR 2026 · 12 citations
- SafeScientist: Enhancing AI Scientist Safety for Risk-Aware Scientific DiscoveryKunlun Zhu, Jiaxun Zhang, Ziheng Qi, Nuoxing Shang et al.EMNLP 2025
- Gravity-Bench-v1: A Benchmark on Gravitational Physics Discovery for AgentsNolan Koblischke, Hyunseok Jang, Kristen Menou, Mohamad Ali-DibICML 2025
- FIRE-Bench: Evaluating AI Agents on the Rediscovery of Scientific InsightsZhen Wang, Fan Bai, Zhongyan Luo, Jinyan Su et al.ICML 2026 · 2 citations
