Can Large Language Models Review the Scientific Literature? A Test Against a 102-Article Benchmark
arXiv cs.AIen
arXiv:2611.05459v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used to support scientific literature reviews, yet evaluations often examine individual tasks rather than the review process as a whole. We assess six AI tools across four stages: finding relevant articles, interpreting them, synthesizing across them, and proposing future research. The benchmark is a published review of the Spanish plume weather pattern and its 102-article corpus. In the initial searches, five tools collectively identified 57 articles, with the best individual tool finding 42. Institutional library access increased discovery from 42 to 82 articles for Codex and from 15 to 79 for Cla
This is a short summary published by AI Global Wire. The full article is owned and hosted by arXiv cs.AI — open it there to read it in full.
Read the full story at arXiv cs.AI- Verktyg
- Forskning
- Företag
Related AI news
- Google turns off AI for schoolchildren by defaultEconomic Times Tech · November 5, 2026
- Who May Overrule the Agent? Evidence-Gated Authority in LLM Review InstitutionsarXiv cs.AI · November 5, 2026
- Verified but Vacuous: Three Failure Surfaces of LLM-Driven Verified Code GenerationarXiv cs.AI · November 5, 2026
- Agent Harness Awareness: Turning Verified Telemetry into Operational Control for Tool-Using AgentsarXiv cs.AI · November 5, 2026
- Uncertainty-Aware Resource Orchestration for Agentic AI SystemsarXiv cs.AI · November 5, 2026
- A Feasibility Condition for Confidence-Gated Tiered LLM InferencearXiv cs.AI · November 5, 2026