DynaMate: Leveraging AI-agents for customized research workflows
Open accessAbstract
Developments related to large language models (LLMs) have deeply impacted everyday activities and offer the potential to automate complex research workflows involving repetitive and time-consuming tasks. The presented template enables the rapid incorporation of custom tools with LLM agents.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
These papers typically split the workflow into role-specific agents for planning, structure retrieval, simulation execution, analysis, and quality control.
“These papers typically split the workflow into role-specific agents for planning, structure retrieval, simulation execution, analysis, and quality control [18,19,21,25,26,35-38,41,42].”
From From Scientific Copilots to Tool-Grounded Autonomy: AI Agents in Simulation-Driven Materials Discovery (2026) · cites this paper as [21]
The Overview of agents and tools (page unavailable) describes five specialized agents and a scheduler. It identifies agents for system preparation, simulation execution, and analysis, including a convergence check that serves a quality-control function. It does not describe separate agents for planning or structure retrieval, so the full list of roles is not supported by this paper. (LLM, conf=0.86)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredPapers such as SmartCIF, DynaMate, VASPilot, Matty, GENIUS, and ToPolyAgent show that a substantial share of the current advance lies not in replacing scientific judgment with text generation, but in making brittle infrastructural steps programmable and recoverable.
“Papers such as SmartCIF, DynaMate, VASPilot, Matty, GENIUS, and ToPolyAgent show that a substantial share of the current advance lies not in replacing scientific judgment with text generation, but in making these brittle infrastructural steps programmable and recoverable [21,25,37-39,42].”
From From Scientific Copilots to Tool-Grounded Autonomy: AI Agents in Simulation-Driven Materials Discovery (2026) · cites this paper as [21]
Split into 2 atoms — 0 confirmed, 2 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe remaining literature was distributed across general materials-workflow papers, atomistic simulation infrastructures, MOF and porous-material screening, and polymer simulation.
“The remaining literature was distributed across general materials-workflow papers, atomistic simulation infrastructures, MOF and porous-material screening, and polymer simulation [17,21,22,24-26,32,35-42].”
From From Scientific Copilots to Tool-Grounded Autonomy: AI Agents in Simulation-Driven Materials Discovery (2026) · cites this paper as [21]
Other papers were more demonstrative, emphasizing workflow feasibility, design navigation, or case-based success rather than tightly standardized metrics.
“Other papers were more demonstrative, emphasizing workflow feasibility, design navigation, or case-based success rather than tightly standardized metrics [17,18,21,22,35,37-39,41].”
From From Scientific Copilots to Tool-Grounded Autonomy: AI Agents in Simulation-Driven Materials Discovery (2026) · cites this paper as [21]
Some studies are simulator-native: the agent configures or executes atomistic or thermodynamic tools directly.
“Some studies are simulator-native: the agent configures or executes atomistic or thermodynamic tools directly [21,25,28,29,31,33,36,38-42].”
From From Scientific Copilots to Tool-Grounded Autonomy: AI Agents in Simulation-Driven Materials Discovery (2026) · cites this paper as [21]
In several papers, the strongest reproducibility evidence came from public code, tutorials, datasets, or supplementary traces.
“In several papers, the strongest reproducibility evidence came from public code, tutorials, datasets, or supplementary traces [18-21,23,25,28,30,31,35-42].”
From From Scientific Copilots to Tool-Grounded Autonomy: AI Agents in Simulation-Driven Materials Discovery (2026) · cites this paper as [21]
The most persuasive papers linked the language model to DFT, molecular dynamics, adsorption screening, process simulation, CALPHAD, crystallographic curation, or robotic execution.
“Instead, they linked it to DFT, molecular dynamics, adsorption screening, process simulation, CALPHAD, crystallographic curation, or robotic execution [18,21,25,28,29,31-36,39-42].”
From From Scientific Copilots to Tool-Grounded Autonomy: AI Agents in Simulation-Driven Materials Discovery (2026) · cites this paper as [21]
MDCrow introduced a single-agent system built on LangChain, leveraging GPT-4o and Llama3-405B to automate biomolecular MD workflows using tools like OpenMM, MDTraj, and PDBFixer.
“For example MDCrow introduced a single agent system built on LangChain, 23 leveraging GPT-4o and Llama3-405B to automate biomolecular MD workflows using tools like OpenMM, MDTraj, and PDBFixer.24”
From Multi-agentic AI framework for end-to-end atomistic simulations (2026) · cites this paper as [23]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 35 · Cited by 12
- Authors
- Mendible-Barreto, O. A., Díaz-Maldonado, M., Carmona Esteva, F. J., Torres, J. E., Córdova-Figueroa, U. M., & Colón, Y. J.
- Affiliations
- University of Notre Dame (US)
- University of Puerto Rico System (PR)
- Department of Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering, University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame, IN, 46556, USA
- Merrimack College (US)
- Department of Chemical Engineering, Universidad de Puerto Rico, Mayagüez, PR, 00680, USA
- Corresponding author
- Colón, Yamil J.
- ORCID
- Venue
- Molecular Systems Design & Engineering
- Publisher
- Royal Society of Chemistry (RSC)
- Published
- 2025
- Volume
- 10
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- 585-598
- ISSN
- 2058-9689 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W4410598591
- Cited by
- 12
- References
- 35
- Citations by year
- 2026: 11 · 2025: 1
- FWCI
- 12.05
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Locations
- Molecular Systems Design & Engineering (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- Funders
- University of Notre Dame
- U.S. Department of Education (P200A210048)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Scientific Computing and Data Management
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Artificial Intelligence Applications
- Physical Sciences › Materials Science › Materials Chemistry › Machine Learning in Materials Science
- Keywords
- large language models, AI agents, research workflow automation, LLM agents
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review