EvoMaster: A Foundational Evolving Agent Framework for Agentic Science at Scale
Open accessAbstract
The convergence of large language models and agents is catalyzing a new era of scientific discovery: Agentic Science. However, common agent infrastructure is repeatedly rebuilt across scientific fields (loop fragmentation) and useful evidence and experience are lost in long-horizon research (loop discontinuity), bringing obstacles to Agentic Science at Scale. We introduce EvoMaster, a foundational evolving agent framework for Agentic Science at Scale. EvoMaster handles loop fragmentation and loop discontinuity by implementing Loop Research in which external evidence persists and improves later decisions. Through three nested loops, Execution, Exploration and Evolution (E$^3$), loop research connects research within runs, across experiments and across studies. Across ten benchmarks spanning scientific research, coding and reasoning, EvoMaster achieves the best score among four agents using GPT-5.4, reaching a mean score of 58.02%, and outperforms the strongest competing agent Codex(40.29%) while costing 35.6% less. These results show that a shared loop-research foundation can support diverse scientific agents at scale.
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?
The AI-scientist theme has fragmented into dozens of domain-specific descendants.
“the theme has since fragmented into dozens of domain-specific descendants”
From Recursive Self-Improvement in AI: From Bounded Self-Refinement to Autonomous Research Loops (2026) · cites this paper as [175]
Cites
BrowseComp-ZH: Benchmarking Web Browsing Ability of Large Language Models in Chinese
Zhou, P., Leon, B., Ying, X., Zhang, C., Shao, Y., Ye, Q., Chong, D., Jin, Z., Xie, C., Cao, M., et al. (2025) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2504.19314 · cited 2×
“Scientific reasoning and information search is evaluated by Frontier Science [38], BrowseComp [41], BrowseComp-ZH [46], and HLE [30].”
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Recursive Self-Improvement in AI: From Bounded Self-Refinement to Autonomous Research Loops
Chen, M., Wang, L., & Qu, B. (2026) · arXiv
- Authors
- Zhu, X., Cai, Y., Liu, Z., Wang, C., Li, F., Jin, W., Liu, W., Bing, Z., Zheng, B., Chai, J., Tang, S., Ye, R., Du, Y., Pang, X., Du, Y., Miao, T., Zhang, Y., Liao, R., Ding, Z., Zhang, L., Wang, Y., E, W., & Chen, S.
- Affiliations
- Shanghai Jiao Tong University (CN)
- Venue
- arXiv
- Publisher
- arXiv
- Published
- 2026
- ISSN
- 2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
- arXiv
- 2604.17406
- OpenAlex
- W7155070469
- Cited by
- 0
- References
- 1
- Type
- posted content
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- arxiv.org
- Locations
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Artificial Intelligence Applications
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › AI-based Problem Solving and Planning
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Scientific Computing and Data Management
- Keywords
- nested loops, large language models, scientific discovery, coding agents, reasoning 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