The DOI matches its DataCite record; its reference list is not available.
Toward a Team of AI-made Scientists for Scientific Discovery from Gene Expression Data
Open accessAbstract
Machine learning has emerged as a powerful tool for scientific discovery, enabling researchers to extract meaningful insights from complex datasets. For instance, it has facilitated the identification of disease-predictive genes from gene expression data, significantly advancing healthcare. However, the traditional process for analyzing such datasets demands substantial human effort and expertise for the data selection, processing, and analysis. To address this challenge, we introduce a novel framework, a Team of AI-made Scientists (TAIS), designed to streamline the scientific discovery pipeline. TAIS comprises simulated roles, including a project manager, data engineer, and domain expert, each represented by a Large Language Model (LLM). These roles collaborate to replicate the tasks typically performed by data scientists, with a specific focus on identifying disease-predictive genes. Furthermore, we have curated a benchmark dataset to assess TAIS's effectiveness in gene identification, demonstrating our system's potential to significantly enhance the efficiency and scope of scientific exploration. Our findings represent a solid step towards automating scientific discovery through large language models.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
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?
In the citing paper
“It helps scientists with data analysis, hypothesis generation, and experiment planning, but requires human validation before execution.”
From Agentic AI for Scientific Discovery: A Survey of Progress, Challenges, and Future Directions (2025) · cites this paper as Liu et al., 2024
Citations
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
Cited by 4
Metadata
- Authors
- Liu, H., Li, Y., Jian, J., Cheng, Y., Lu, J., Guo, S., Zhu, J., Zhang, M., Zhang, M., & Wang, H.
- Affiliations
- University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign (US)
- University of California San Diego (US)
- Huazhong Agricultural University (CN)
- Huazhong University of Science and Technology (CN)
- Venue
- arXiv
- Publisher
- arXiv
- Published
- 2024
- ISSN
- 2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
- arXiv
- 2402.12391
- OpenAlex
- W4392077871
- Cited by
- 4
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2025: 2 · 2024: 2
- Type
- posted content
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- arxiv.org
- Locations
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Gene expression and cancer classification
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Biomedical Text Mining and Ontologies
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Scientific Computing and Data Management
- Keywords
- large language models, automated scientific discovery, gene expression data, agent cooperation, benchmark dataset
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