AI is rapidly advancing neuroscience, yet many laboratories fail to fully unleash its potential due to significant interdisciplinary barriers. While pre-trained neural models for physiological data are progressing quickly, their heterogeneous architectures and modality-specific constraints hinder systematic integration, selection, and evaluation. Despite recent advances in large language model (LLM)-based agent systems for intelligent scientific applications, existing approaches often still lack the domain expertise required to effectively select and coordinate diverse neuroscience pre-trained models and handle unique data types in this domain. We present NS-Copilot, an LLM-driven multi-agent system for neuroscience analysis that autonomously supports end-to-end workflows for diverse professional tasks. It unifies domain-specific pre-trained models and supports key neuroscience modalities, including EEG and extracellular spike data, through a natural-language interface. Given raw data and a task description, NS-Copilot orchestrates agents with specialized roles for planning, adaptive control, code generation, and result synthesis, enabling analysis without dataset-specific heuristics. We evaluate NS-Copilot on neuroscience benchmarks spanning Alzheimer's disease, Parkinson's disease, and working memory spike decoding. Across 8 trials per task, the system consistently outperforms strong baselines on the primary metric, demonstrating the ability of NS-Copilot for effective and scalable neuroscience analysis.
Zijiao Chen, Nicholas Lu, Xinhui Li +14cs.AI q-bio.NC
AI agents can execute scientific analyses, but an analytic output becomes a defensible claim only after alternatives are weighed and the claim is limited to what the evidence supports. Agents may reproduce failures including selective analysis, premature declarations of success and optimization of imperfect criteria. We present Brain Researcher, an agentic research harness operating in a neuroimaging researcher's computational environment under rules for admissible analyses, required checks and claim scope. In benchmarks, Brain Researcher increased first-choice tool-selection accuracy across seven models by 70.2 percentage points (23.3% without it versus 93.6% with it) and verifiable grounding from 4.6% to 22.0%. In collaborator-led and self-evolving studies, multiverse analyses exposed analytic-choice sensitivity, and scientific review classified claims as accepted, qualified, revised, blocked, rejected or deferred. By linking decisions to evidence and provenance, Brain Researcher embeds methodological judgment within the workflow, not after it.