Can AI Follow In Einstein's Footsteps?

AI is accelerating physics discovery, but perhaps away from Einstein-level theory building. To understand this gap, we must recognize a striking trend: while being very successful, the most visible AI contributions to physics discovery appear to mirror the historical development of physics, but in reverse. Human discovery in physics progressed, in broad strokes, from ancient pattern prediction, through phenomenological laws such as Kepler's, to principle-based universal theories such as relativity and the Standard Model. On the AI side, prominent contributions to physics discovery point in the opposite direction: early milestones emphasized explicit equation-discovery methods, such as symbolic regression, whereas more recent frontier contributions are powerful predictors such as AlphaFold and GraphCast, which can be remarkably accurate yet do not provide clear theoretical understanding. If this trend continues, AI would become extraordinarily good at prediction but may struggle to ever propose its first serious contender to quantum gravity or other paradigm-level theories. We review the current landscape of AI for physics discovery and highlight a critical missing skill: the ability to pose the right questions or invent the right principles to guide the development of new theories and the tests to falsify them. This mode of discovery has driven many of the deepest advances since the 17th century, where symmetry, simplicity, and new mathematical frameworks guided theory construction before experimental tests. Equipping AI systems with such skills could move them from predicting within known frameworks to proposing the next paradigm-level discovery in physics.

Closing the Loop to Discover Psychological Theories with an Automated Cognitive Scientist

Across the sciences, autonomous systems are increasingly being used in closed-loop discovery, proposing new theories and designing and running experiments to test them. This approach is yet to be applied in the field of cognitive science, where the central bottleneck is theory-building: the creative step of turning the accumulated failures of existing models into better ones. Theory generation has remained manual even as data collection, modeling, and experiment design have been automated. We present the Automated Cognitive Scientist (AutoCog), a fully autonomous agentic-AI system that closes this loop. Large-language-model agents advocate competing theories, each expressed as an executable cognitive model, design experiments that best discriminate them, collect behavioral data from participants recruited online, score theories against collected data based on their generative performance, diagnose why they fail, and synthesize a better successor. Repeating this cycle allows them to search the space of theories, models, and experiments. In the domain of decision-making, AutoCog recovered known decision-making strategies from simulated behavior, including unconventional ones, showing that its discoveries are ultimately driven by the data rather than strictly bound by the priors of the underlying language models. When run with human participants, it produced theories that outperformed the established theories it was seeded with and generalized to held-out studies in two different experimental settings. It also surfaced a novel theory of multi-cue decision-making in which choices show diminishing sensitivity to feature values. The distinctive predictions of this theory were confirmed in a preregistered study with new participants. AutoCog demonstrates how an automated discovery system can be used to turn cognitive theory-building into an explicit, executable, and cumulative science.