Lune

NeurIPS2025顶会

Predicting Empirical AI Research Outcomes with Language Models

Jiaxin Wen, Chenglei Si, Yueh-Han Chen, He He, Shi Feng

2025年份
18被引次数
2顶会引用

摘要

Many promising-looking ideas in AI research fail to deliver, but their validation takes substantial human labor and compute. Predicting an idea's chance of success is thus crucial for accelerating empirical AI research, a skill that even expert researchers can only acquire through substantial experience. We build the first benchmark for this task and compare LMs with human experts. Concretely, given two research ideas (e.g., two jailbreaking methods), we aim to predict which will perform better on a set of benchmarks. We scrape ideas and experimental results from conference papers, yielding 1,444 human-verified idea pairs published after our base model's cut-off date for testing, and 6,000 pairs for training. We then develop a system that combines a fine-tuned GPT-4.1 with a paper retrieval agent, and we recruit 25 human experts to compare with. In the NLP domain, our system beats human experts by a large margin (64.4% v.s. 48.9%). On the full test set, our system achieves 77% accuracy, while off-the-shelf frontier LMs like o3 perform no better than random guessing, even with the same retrieval augmentation. We verify that our system does not exploit superficial features like idea complexity through extensive human-written and LM-designed robustness tests. Finally, we evaluate our system on unpublished novel ideas, including ideas generated by an AI ideation agent. Our system achieves 63.6% accuracy, demonstrating its potential as a reward model for improving idea generation models. Altogether, our results outline a promising new direction for LMs to accelerate empirical AI research. Figure 1: Our system is more accurate than human NLP experts. Majority aggregates predictions from all annotators, while Best keeps only the best-performing annotator per research topic. For the stress test, we select a subset of idea pairs where the mathematically complex one is actually ineffective. While humans often get misled by this feature, our model does not. 39th Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS 2025).

问问这篇 Paper

智能体会读完全文。

Lune 把这篇 Paper 索引到了每一个公式,引用它的顶会 Paper 也一样。你提问,回答直接引用原文。

可以从这些问题问起

智能体调用

Luneget_paper_fulltext

在 Lune 里问

免费开始,无需绑卡

引用它的顶会 Paper2

问问它们各自怎么用它

它引用的顶会 Paper8

相关 Paper

黄昏的海面,两侧是细线勾勒的悬崖