R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Jr. AI Scientist and Its Risk Report: Autonomous Scientific Exploration from a Baseline Paper
November 06, 2025 Β· Declared Dead Β· π arXiv.org
Authors
Atsuyuki Miyai, Mashiro Toyooka, Takashi Otonari, Zaiying Zhao, Kiyoharu Aizawa
arXiv ID
2511.04583
Category
cs.AI: Artificial Intelligence
Cross-listed
cs.CL,
cs.CV,
cs.LG
Citations
1
Venue
arXiv.org
Repository
https://github.com/Agent4Science-UTokyo/Jr.AI-Scientist
Last Checked
2 months ago
Abstract
Understanding the current capabilities and risks of AI Scientist systems is essential for ensuring trustworthy and sustainable AI-driven scientific progress while preserving the integrity of the academic ecosystem. To this end, we develop Jr. AI Scientist, a state-of-the-art autonomous AI scientist system that mimics the core research workflow of a novice student researcher: Given the baseline paper from the human mentor, it analyzes its limitations, formulates novel hypotheses for improvement, and iteratively conducts experiments until improvements are realized, and writes a paper with the results. Unlike previous approaches that assume full automation or operate on small-scale code, Jr. AI Scientist follows a well-defined research workflow and leverages modern coding agents to handle complex, multi-file implementations, leading to scientifically valuable contributions. Through our experiments, the Jr. AI Scientist successfully generated new research papers that build upon real NeurIPS, IJCV, and ICLR works by proposing and implementing novel methods. For evaluation, we conducted automated assessments using AI Reviewers, author-led evaluations, and submissions to Agents4Science, a venue dedicated to AI-driven scientific contributions. The findings demonstrate that Jr. AI Scientist generates papers receiving higher review scores than existing fully automated systems. Nevertheless, we identify important limitations from both the author evaluation and the Agents4Science reviews, indicating the potential risks of directly applying current AI Scientist systems and key challenges for future research. Finally, we comprehensively report various risks identified during development. We believe this study clarifies the current role and limitations of AI Scientist systems, offering insights into the areas that still require human expertise and the risks that may emerge as these systems evolve.
Community Contributions
Found the code? Know the venue? Think something is wrong? Let us know!
π Similar Papers
In the same crypt β Artificial Intelligence
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI): Concepts, Taxonomies, Opportunities and Challenges toward Responsible AI
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Addressing Function Approximation Error in Actor-Critic Methods
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Explanation in Artificial Intelligence: Insights from the Social Sciences
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Think you have Solved Question Answering? Try ARC, the AI2 Reasoning Challenge
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Complex Embeddings for Simple Link Prediction
Died the same way β π 404 Not Found
R.I.P.
π
404 Not Found
Deep High-Resolution Representation Learning for Visual Recognition
R.I.P.
π
404 Not Found
HuggingFace's Transformers: State-of-the-art Natural Language Processing
R.I.P.
π
404 Not Found
CCNet: Criss-Cross Attention for Semantic Segmentation
R.I.P.
π
404 Not Found