Retrieved scientific literature can serve as inspiration for both human and AI scientists. Inspiration can take different forms: prior work may directly suggest how to address a problem, or surface directions at different levels of abstraction - zooming out to a more general view or zooming in to a concrete realization. We introduce RATIO (Retrieval Across Typed Ideation Operations), a large-scale benchmark in which relevance is defined by three operations which we name ideation moves: Address retrieves potential approaches for stated problems, Broaden retrieves more general formulations, and Specify retrieves concrete instantiations. RATIO is constructed from millions of full-text scientific papers across CS literature via a general recipe that extends discourse-marker distant supervision - previously used only for classification - to corpus-scale retrieval, combined with extensive LLM and human vetting. Experiments show that operation-specific fine-tuning substantially boosts retrievers but leaves much room for further improvements. RATIO provides a scalable training and evaluation framework for retrieval components that support literature-grounded ideation, opening up new research avenues on scientific inspiration retrieval.
Italo Luis da Silva, Hanqi Yan, Yujing Wang +3cs.IR cs.CL
Scientific papers may relate by problem, method, result, or contribution, but document-level retrievers collapse these into a single similarity score without saying why they are related. Citation- and similarity-based retrieval alone also confines search to the neighbourhood of what is already known, whereas generative retrieval generates document identifiers directly, enabling the exploratory retrieval that scientific discovery depends on. We connect papers in a graph whose edges are typed by these four facets, derived from facet items and citation signals, and distil it into a generative retriever whose identifiers are the papers' own facet text. Two graph properties do not survive naive distillation. First, because every training pair is an edge, naive enumeration indexes just 84% of the corpus. Coverage-aware distillation makes every paper learnable through a reverse-neighbour fallback, a minimum-coverage threshold, and edge-importance weighting. Second, constrained decoding guarantees that every generated identifier is a valid paper, but not that the graph connects it to the query. Graph-weighted reciprocal rank fusion scales each candidate's rank term by its query-candidate edge weight, dropping unsupported ones. On LitWeave, our constructed corpus of 11,359 NLP papers, Graft recovers 91% of its graph teacher's Recall@20 with no nearest-neighbour index or encoder at inference, and outperforms the graph teacher on query papers outside the corpus. It reproduces the graph's own facet labels at 0.922 precision, so every returned paper arrives labelled with the facet that surfaced it rather than an opaque score.
Valentin Romanov, Monique Bax, Steven Niederercs.AI cs.DB
Accurately extracting nuanced, contextualized data from research articles is laborious and time intensive. Here, we investigate the performance of frontier, browser-based large language models (LLMs) to extract highly contextualized information. We demonstrate four escalating workflows, 1) given an expert curated prompt and research articles, most frontier LLMs perform well at data extraction, however can struggle with interpreting scientific context and nuance, 2) given simple instructions, LLMs can author their own prompts which were almost as eNective as expert-written prompts, 3) autonomous discovery of research literature was diNicult, agents either missed or hallucinated references, and 4) LLMs can create new datasets from published guidelines that closely match human-expert judges, but still require a human-in-the-loop. Together, these findings define an auditable division of labour in which experts specify the evidence standard, models cross-check repeated extractions and researchers resolve disputed cases, providing a practical route to scaling scientific data curation without relinquishing expert oversight.
Daniele Raimondi, Feichi Lu, Oliver Grun +2cs.DL cs.AI
The increasing specialization of scientific research challenges existing classification systems, which provide effective representations of broad disciplines and research topics but often fail to capture the fine-grained conceptual structure of contemporary science. Author keywords offer greater specificity, but their fragmentation, redundancy, and terminological variability limit their use as stable units of knowledge organization. We introduce SCALE (Scientific Concept Aggregation via LLMs and Embeddings), a framework that extends the OpenAlex taxonomy with a new level of scientific Concepts below Topics. Rather than treating keywords as isolated descriptors, SCALE organizes semantically related terms into coherent and interpretable conceptual units and integrates them within the existing disciplinary hierarchy. The framework combines scientific text embeddings, large language models, and graph-based community detection to construct this additional layer at scale. The resulting taxonomy enables scientific literature to be read through an intermediate conceptual level between broad research topics and individual documents. This perspective provides a more detailed representation of how scientific knowledge is structured, specialized, and connected across disciplines. By transforming heterogeneous author terminology into reusable hierarchical units, SCALE offers a foundation for fine-grained scholarly classification, scientometric analysis, research monitoring, and future ontology development.
Maxime Gorres, Jan Göpfert, Patrick Kuckertz +5cs.CL
Energy system models guide societally important decisions, but their credibility rests on quantitative assumptions that are difficult to source and audit. Meta-analyses can improve transparency and modeling practices, but the rapid growth of publications makes manual information extraction increasingly impractical. Consequently, databases are updated infrequently and efforts are often duplicated across research groups. Here, we demonstrate the highly accurate automated extraction of quantitative information from 76,000 energy system studies published since 2010. We compile 3.2 million structured quantitative data points together with 20 million associated metadata entries, spanning a broad spectrum of technologies, methodological approaches and system characteristics. Beyond providing input data for models, the resulting FAIR database make the energy systems literature itself analysable. We show where academic assumptions diverge from empirical observed data, and how research priorities vary at scale across technologies, regions and time. To facilitate broad use within the community, the database is provided through an interactive dashboard, enabling users to filter, analyse and download data according to their specific research needs.
Moein Taherinezhad, Sebastian Maier, Gerardo Vitagliano +2cs.AI
Evidence synthesis is crucial for turning primary research into reliable knowledge for science, medicine, education, and policy. Yet, quantitative evidence synthesis remains largely manual and difficult to scale. Here, we introduce AutoSynthesis, an end-to-end multi-agent system for automated meta-analysis. Given a research question in natural language, AutoSynthesis formulates a search strategy, retrieves scientific literature, screens candidate studies, assesses full-text eligibility, extracts quantitative statistics, computes standardized effect sizes, and finally performs random-effects meta-analysis. AutoSynthesis further supports heterogeneity analysis to examine how effect sizes vary across moderators, as well as risk-of-bias assessment. As output, AutoSynthesis produces a transparent report aligned with PRISMA guidelines. In our application, AutoSynthesis screened over 28 studies and extracted more than 20 quantitative claims. The pooled effect estimates produced by AutoSynthesis are similar to Hedges' $g$ of expert-conducted meta-analyses, indicating close agreement with manual evidence synthesis. Together, these results show that AutoSynthesis can make quantitative evidence synthesis more scalable, thereby supporting evidence-based decision-making across disciplines.
Abdul Muntakim, Md Abdullah Al Hafiz Khan, Sadid Hasan +1cs.CL
How does research evolve, and can we trace it at the level of individual claims? Scientific progress is not simply a uniform accumulation of facts. Existing citation graphs usually collapse these roles into a single homogeneous edge type, limiting how we can analyze scientific progress. We introduce SciTraj, a typed citation corpus for tracing research evolution across natural language processing, machine learning, and computer vision. SciTraj includes 32,559 papers published between 2015 and 2024 and 573,126 directed edges spanning six research-relation types. Unlike traditional citation graphs, each edge is paired with the claim sentence that motivates its label. Claim-driven relations are verified by natural language inference against their local in-paper context. The corpus further organizes these relations into multi-step typed trajectories that trace how ideas develop across papers and over time. We evaluate the corpus along three dimensions. First, a three-annotator pilot achieves Fleiss' $κ=0.74$ and 79.9\% majority-vote precision for relation labels, indicating substantial agreement and reliable labeling. Second, corpus-level analyses reveal clear disciplinary siloing in the directional flow of research relations. Topic analysis further identifies rapidly growing clusters dominated by vision and LLM-related research and declining clusters associated with several classical machine-learning topics. We further evaluate SciTraj using a temporally split link-prediction benchmark and a year-shuffle falsifiability test that distinguishes genuine temporal signal from year-correlated content. Under this setting, \textsc{SciTraj-Pair} performs strongly, but its AUC drops by 0.288 when publication years are shuffled, showing that its predictions depend not only on content but also on the temporal order in which research develops.
We present the knowledge manifold: a Riemannian geometric space in which a corpus of documents is arranged according to semantic positional relationships derived from character n-gram TF-IDF representations. The framework proceeds in five tightly coupled stages. First, each document is converted to a character-level n-gram TF-IDF vector (4-7 grams, up to 250,000 features, L2-normalized) and embedded in a two-dimensional knowledge map via constrained stress minimization with repulsion, variance, and centering regularizers. Second, knowledge at an arbitrary query point is estimated through Smoothed Particle Hydrodynamics (SPH) interpolation using a cubic-spline kernel, yielding an interpolated TF-IDF feature vector that can be linguistically characterized. Third, directional knowledge gradients at 0, 45, and 90 degrees are computed from the SPH interpolation map, and pairwise directional similarity is quantified via inner product and cosine similarity. Fourth, a Gaussian Process Regression (GPR) model, with a Constant x RBF + White kernel fitted on a 10-dimensional SVD projection, provides a Bayesian posterior mean, uncertainty estimate, and per-document contribution rate at the query point. Fifth, geodesics in the knowledge space are obtained by minimizing a discrete Riemannian path energy derived from the SPH-induced metric tensor, using L-BFGS-B with seven deterministic initial-path candidates. We apply the formulation to a corpus of 20 papers in fiber-reinforced composite materials and aerospace structural mechanics, showing that the semantic map recovers meaningful research clusters, geodesic paths reveal natural conceptual bridges between distant topics, and SPH/GPR interpolation enables the generation of virtual knowledge: hypothetical paper abstracts describing unstudied but geometrically predicted research directions.