Towards Scientific Intelligence: A Survey of LLM-based Scientific Agents
Open accessAbstract
As scientific research becomes increasingly complex, innovative tools are needed to manage vast data, facilitate interdisciplinary collaboration, and accelerate discovery. Large language models (LLMs) are now evolving into LLM-based scientific agents that automate critical tasks ranging from hypothesis generation and experiment design to data analysis and simulation. Unlike general-purpose LLMs, these specialized agents integrate domain-specific knowledge, advanced tool sets, and robust validation mechanisms, enabling them to handle complex data types, ensure reproducibility, and drive scientific breakthroughs. This survey provides a focused review of the architectures, design, benchmarks, applications, and ethical considerations surrounding LLM-based scientific agents. We highlight why they differ from general agents and the ways in which they advance research across various scientific fields. By examining their development and challenges, this survey offers a comprehensive roadmap for researchers and practitioners to harness these agents for more efficient, reliable, and ethically sound scientific discovery.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
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?
Agentic workloads characteristically interleave inference steps to derive the next action and execution steps where the agent calls an external tool.
“These workloads characteristically interleave (a) inference steps to derive the next action, and (b) execution steps where the agent calls an external tool.”
From Continuum: Efficient and Robust Multi-Turn LLM Agent Scheduling with KV Cache Time-to-Live (2025) · cites this paper as [45]
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
Cited by 7
- Authors
- Ren, S., Xie, C., Jian, P., Ren, Z., Leng, C., & Zhang, J.
- Affiliations
- Chinese Academy of Sciences (CN)
- Artificial Intelligence in Medicine (Canada) (CA)
- Venue
- arXiv
- Publisher
- arXiv
- Published
- 2025
- ISSN
- 2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
- arXiv
- 2503.24047
- OpenAlex
- W4417088765
- Cited by
- 7
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 7
- Type
- posted content
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- arxiv.org
- Licence
- Locations
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (cc-by)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Artificial Intelligence Applications
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Topic Modeling
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Scientific Computing and Data Management
- Keywords
- large language models, hypothesis generation, experimental design, scientific data analysis, scientific simulation, reproducibility, agent architecture, benchmarking, interdisciplinary collaboration
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