Pith. sign in

REVIEW 5 cited by

Aviary: training language agents on challenging scientific tasks

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2412.21154 v1 pith:FW7WKZDG submitted 2024-12-30 cs.AI cs.CLcs.LG

classification cs.AIcs.CLcs.LG
keywords agentslanguagetasksenvironmentsscientificaviarychallengingcycles
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Solving complex real-world tasks requires cycles of actions and observations. This is particularly true in science, where tasks require many cycles of analysis, tool use, and experimentation. Language agents are promising for automating intellectual tasks in science because they can interact with tools via natural language or code. Yet their flexibility creates conceptual and practical challenges for software implementations, since agents may comprise non-standard components such as internal reasoning, planning, tool usage, as well as the inherent stochasticity of temperature-sampled language models. Here, we introduce Aviary, an extensible gymnasium for language agents. We formalize agents as policies solving language-grounded partially observable Markov decision processes, which we term language decision processes. We then implement five environments, including three challenging scientific environments: (1) manipulating DNA constructs for molecular cloning, (2) answering research questions by accessing scientific literature, and (3) engineering protein stability. These environments were selected for their focus on multi-step reasoning and their relevance to contemporary biology research. Finally, with online training and scaling inference-time compute, we show that language agents backed by open-source, non-frontier LLMs can match and exceed both frontier LLM agents and human experts on multiple tasks at up to 100x lower inference cost.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 5 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. OpenAlex reports about 7 citations worldwide. Full citation record

  1. E-valuator: Reliable Agent Verifiers with Sequential Hypothesis Testing

    cs.LG 2025-12 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    A density-ratio e-process wrapper converts black-box verifier scores into sequential decisions that control the false-alarm rate for agent trajectories, with empirical gains in early stopping.

  2. EXP-Bench: Can AI Conduct AI Research Experiments?

    cs.AI 2025-05 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    EXP-Bench is a new benchmark of 461 end-to-end AI research experiments, and leading AI agents complete fewer than 1 percent of them successfully.

  3. MDCrow: Automating Molecular Dynamics Workflows with Large Language Models

    cs.AI 2025-02 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    An LLM-based agent with expert tools can automate molecular dynamics workflows, completing 72% of benchmark tasks with gpt-4o and 68% with llama3-405b.

  4. An Auditable Agent Platform For Automated Molecular Optimisation

    cs.LG 2025-08 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    A hierarchical multi-agent LLM platform with recorded provenance improved average predicted binding affinity for AKT1 by 31%, while single-agent runs favored drug-likeness.

  5. On the Comprehensibility of Multi-structured Financial Documents using LLMs and Pre-processing Tools

    cs.IR 2025-06 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    Preprocessing financial PDFs into text, tables, and chart data with existing tools improves LLM question-answering accuracy over direct GPT-4o image input in a small private evaluation.

Pith tools